done. let's see when the first complaints come in and hope fluxbox
changes its event emission.
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Pascal Obry wrote:
>
> Johannes,
>
> So, should we revert the patch?
>
> --
> Pascal Obry / Magny Les Hameaux (78)
>
> The best way to travel is by means of imagina
Johannes,
So, should we revert the patch?
--
Pascal Obry / Magny Les Hameaux (78)
The best way to travel is by means of imagination
http://v2p.fr.eu.org
http://www.obry.net
gpg --keyserver keys.gnupg.net --recv-key F949BD3B
Johannes,
> i still think we shouldn't break fluxbox if we don't have to (but i'm
> not using it myself which doesn't help the priority..).
Ok, I propose to revert the commit then and let people using fluxbox
step in to fix this. As I'm not using fluxbox either I can't help.
--
Pascal Obry /
arguably we could just claim fluxbox's event handling is broken and
leave it unusable for the poor guys (by reverting c101d8f3c again).
example: i go into a window with my pointer, click the left mouse
button, release it again, move away. in dwm i get motionnotify,
buttonpress, buttonrelease, moti
This is release blocking to me.
- the count of image is not properly displayed/updated
- clicking on the background does not remove all selection
Reverting c101d8f3c from master fixes both issues.
Which was a revert for fluxbox event handling.
Johannes, can you have a look?
--
Pascal Obry
