On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Julien Danjou <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, May 21 2010, Daniel Graña wrote: > > Here is another patch that unregister systray if no systray widget is > found > > for a wibox. > > see http://gist.github.com/409310 > > Hum, that does not seems good to me, and actually, that makes me wonder > if the first patch is. Ouch.., I though it was in the correct path this time :( I think you register/unregister at the wrong time. You should register > when the first systray widget is created, and unregister when the last > systray widget is unregistered. > That's cool, but I can't find a place for where I can access phys_screen and widget creation. > In your approach, the X systray is not registered if the systray widget > is never attached to a wibox or displayed. I merged the patch: http://gist.github.com/412326 It is much simple to read now, and it is clear (as you said) that it is registering/unregistering based on systray existence inside wibox for each phys_screen. > While this may works in common usage, it's not valid in theory. > Sorry, but I am a newbie here, can I ask why not? It doesn't makes sense to me to register for systray notifications if systray widgets can't show updates because they are not attached to a wibox. I am OK to rework the patch, but this time I am lost looking for the new place where to hook the register/unregister code. thanks Daniel.
