On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 05:43:13PM -0400, Chris Siebenmann wrote: > > > It's really crap that with xrandr you have to address monitors by > > > name. Can't we restore all the old logic for the users of > > > FScreen.[ch] and just sort the xrandr monitors in a way that > > > matches the old numbering, i.e. 0 = global monitor and the rest in > > > a constant order that doesn't change when new monitors are added? > > > > Maybe. But the problem there is two-fold: > > > > 1. Mapping existing Xinerama screens with their ordering to the _same_ > > screens which XRandR reports (which we don't know, unfortunately); > > > > 2. This assumes XRandR enumerates its screens in some deterministic > > order. Maybe it does, I haven't looked. > > > > I'm not sure what the problem is though---is there some significant > > overhead I'm overlooking? > > As a user, this may be a naive question, but is it possible to offer > a position-based enumeration such that eg monitor 1 is the top left > one and the numbering increases to the right and down? My gut feeling > is that this will match many static multi-monitor configurations (it > certainly matches mine), although I suppose that it doesn't work well > if monitors overlap.
Well, the way I managed Xinerama screens in the past, if I had another screen I'd just have added it to the end of the list and get that as the next screen number inside fvwm. (Of course I've never actually done this; I guess almost nobody just attaches new screens at random). While nunbering monitors trom left to right and top to bottom is a natural approach, it does not necessarily maintain constant screen numbers if a new one is added (at run time or with a restart). But I cannot think of anything better at the moment. The goal must be that the user should not be required to change the configuration file because screen numbers have changed. A restart may be okay. After all that only takes about a second. > (As a user, I also have to say that I like treating all of my monitors > as one large screen that eg change to new virtual pages as a unit. I > hope that this stays an option.) Certainly. Ciao Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Dominik Vogt
