On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 04:33:29 +0200, Carsten Haitzler <ras...@rasterman.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 19:06:37 -0700 Michael Jennings <m...@kainx.org> said: > >> On Thursday, 08 October 2009, at 11:51:32 (+1100), >> Carsten Haitzler wrote: >> >> > ok. time to chime in. waaay waaay back... back in the early days. no >> > one other than motif set those hints. many others understood them >> > and did it so apps that asked for no borders got them, but NO ONE >> > claims to be a motif. icewm, sawfish, windowmaker, ... ALL of these >> > understand mwm hints, and display no borders. i can find other wm's >> > that did the same. metacity is a modern one for example. but e did >> > too (e14/15/16 days). support the hint and not provide motif wm info >> > hints. no one set motif wm info because no apps required it - they >> > ASSUMED mwm hint support. that was the actual common - if not 100% >> > behavior case (it was universal that i saw). >> > >> > so as such history says "doesn't matter if the motif wm info hint is >> > there, the wm probably supports it, and likely hasnt set that hint" >> > as NO ONE sets it other than mwm (that i know of or can find) out of >> > all the wm's that actually support it. if you google for >> > _MOTIF_WM_INFO you will find a tonne of distro and app bug report >> > systems all patching out the motif wm info checks from eterm (and >> > urxvt) as they simply dont work in the common case. >> >> They're actually all from the same few people/threads. (I did that >> search myself.) >> >> > i'm not saying that the eterm code is technically wrong. the problem >> > is you are not going to go change 5, 6, 7, 8 or more wm's to >> > suddenly provide the _MOTIF_WM_INFO hints. everyone is patching the >> > reverse. removing it as it is "moot" because the wm's "everyone >> > uses" (notice in quotes) suports the hints, but doesnt advertise >> > being mwm. >> >> Well, something does. On my system, and every system I've ever used, >> something sets that property. Maybe it's in X itself; I always >> assumed it was E, but maybe not. > > no idea, but e (1, 2, 3...14, 15, 16 or 17) has never set it. beats me > what > does - but i certainly dont have it set here. it doesnt get set when > running > those other wm's i mentioned for example. :) but X shouldnt set it - its > not a > core X property. some client/app sets it. but as i said. it'd not set by > any of > the wm's that support it (other than mwm i guess - dont have it here to > test > with). > Actually, e16 does set _MOTIF_WM_INFO and has for as long back as svn history goes (1999). I haven't ever seen or heard of problems caused by that. /Kim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Come build with us! The BlackBerry(R) Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9 - 12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconference _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
