John, perchance do you use Metacity rather than Compiz? The reason I ask is that I'm still seeing the unfocused dialog issue and was trying different things to work out why you were failing to see it. If I switch to Metacity the problem goes away.
While this is apparently a window manager issue, I think it would be good if a solution could be found. I'd think this even if Metacity were going to be the default window manager. But I heard somewhere that OpenSolaris is switching over to Compiz by default. Take care. --joanie On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 15:48 +0000, jmr wrote: > Padraig - thanks for the comments, in fixing this also noticed a few > Webinstall UI issues that I have cleaned up (#12433): > > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~jmr/pm_12000_webinstall_disabled_3Nov_333pm/ > 12000 Using Webinstall with a disabled publisher is cumbersome > 12290 Proceed button disabled after being invoked in WebInstall > 12433 Webinstall UI cleanup > > JR > > > Padraig O'Briain wrote: > > Some comments on changes to webinstall.py: > > > > Can self.repo_gui be None at line 348? > Check added. > > > > Is update_package_list called in main (GUI) thread or another thread? > > If not the GUI thread I am concerned about calling gtk.main_iteration(). > Removed. > > > > Padraig > > > > On 11/03/09 08:22, John Rice wrote: > >> Thanks Joanie and Shawn - so we will leave this for now as is. > >> Hopefully the performance issue will improve in the future. I will > >> check on the focus issue before submitting. > >> > >> Shawn the reason we are doing the disable -> enable -> disable > >> sequence is that the user has disabled the Publisher for a reason, > >> but we still want them to be able to install packages from the > >> Publisher and leave the system in the same state before they started > >> the p5i install. > >> > >> This covers the use case of someone periodically installing a > >> package from a Publisher they use infrequently and have no desire to > >> see in PM listings or in search results. > >> > >> JR > >> > >> > >> Joanmarie Diggs wrote: > >>> On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 15:04 -0600, Shawn Walker wrote: > >>> > >>>> John Rice wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Good question Joanie, I think this is required to trigger the > >>>>> catalog updates. We are just operating on a Publisher object when > >>>>> we set it to disabled, for the update to take effect I believe you > >>>>> need to trigger the update, but Shawn would know best. > >>>>> > >>>> Yes, you need the update for the image to correctly reflect what > >>>> packages are available. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Well.... Then, at least hypothetically, couldn't pkg do a mini-update > >>> rather than a full update, given that: > >>> > >>> * an update was just done moments prior, and thus the image > >>> presumably correctly reflects what packages are available > >>> > >>> * the only thing which has changed since that update is the > >>> installation > >>> of a finite set of known packages > >>> > >>> * the publisher in question is being re-disabled > >>> > >>> * the user cannot interact with that publisher until it becomes > >>> re-enabled (right?), at which point a full update will occur > >>> > >>> Anyhoo.... :-) > >>> > >>> Regardless of the above, this new functionality is cool. As it is. > >>> Thanks again John. > >>> > >>> --joanie > >>> > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> pkg-discuss mailing list > >> pkg-discuss@opensolaris.org > >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss > _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list pkg-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
