Thomas Adam wrote:
Hello --

2009/9/9 Leeman Strout <m...@mooluv.com>:
I believe that I am experiencing a bug in the weighted sorting for
FvwmIconMan.

pertinent Iconman config:
*FvwmIconMan: Sort       weighted

*FvwmIconMan: SortWeight 5  class=Firefox
*FvwmIconMan: SortWeight 15 class=gvim
*FvwmIconMan: SortWeight 15 name=jEdit*
*FvwmIconMan: SortWeight 20 class=Terminal
*FvwmIconMan: SortWeight 30 class=pidgin

*FvwmIconMan: SortWeight 40

Actual results in IconMan:
Firefox / gcalc / gvim / pidgin / gftp / jEdit / Thunar / Terminal

Expected results:
Firefox / gvim / jEdit / Terminal / pidgin / (gftp / Thunar / gcalc)

Sorry it's taken me so long to get back to -- I've been busy.  I think
I've found the bug you're referring to -- patch attached, so if you
could apply it to the latest CVS HEAD, that'd be grand.

But first -- I really hope the above config snippet is in error -- I
mean, you *do* realise that the window Class, like everything else is
case-sensitive, right?   For me pidgin's class is really "Pidgin", and
gvim's class is really "Gvim".  You'll want to correct that first, and
I suspect when you do you'll get your expected result -- because at
the moment, the windows are being treated as though they had a
weighting of 40 in your example.

However, there is an edge-case in the comparisons for working out when
the slots for the windows are meant to happen, and it's that which
this patch tries to address.  I really haven't tested it, so I would
appreciate you do thoroughly before I even consider adding it to CVS.

-- Thomas Adam



I realize that it's all case sensitive, and I used xprop to find this info. As for specific cases for case sensitivity, this is what xprop says for gvim: WM_CLASS(STRING) = "gvim", "Gvim" and pidgin: WM_CLASS(STRING) = "pidgin", "Pidgin" So those should be no issue I would think.

Paying attention to your specifying "class" I re-read the IconMan man page. Is IconMan not able to deal with name="..." as in my jEdit line?

Other than that it would seem that this config should work.


Leeman

Reply via email to