>> X_CreatePixmap: BadValue (integer parameter out of range for operation) 0x0
>> X_CopyArea: BadDrawable (invalid Pixmap or Window parameter) 0xa00043
>> X_FreePixmap: BadPixmap (invalid Pixmap parameter) 0xa00043
> I have no local access.
Just curious: when you say there's "no local acc
> Sorry, I should have said "seevral places in the flush() method without
> checking..." though mostly to call the draw() method, so if draw() is
> internally always checking that the xid is non-null it may well be
> fine...!
Good. For now, I will keep my patch until my tests are ok for a next fl
> > "myi->other_xid" is subsequently used in several places
> without always
> > checking to see if it is NULL or not, so I worry that this
> will throw
> > other issues.
>
>
> I hope not in to much places because Fl_Double_Window::resize(...)
> already put other_xid to 0 (marker for deletion)
>
> Hmm, I fear that will cause more problems than it solves...
Probably right. But still not encounter on my tests.
>
> "myi->other_xid" is subsequently used in several places without always
> checking to see if it is NULL or not, so I worry that this will throw
> other issues.
I hope not in
> > Might be worth trying with non-zero dimensions, just to see if that
> > makes any different here...
> >
> > e.g. try;MyWin() : T(5,5,90,90) {}
> >
>
> Works fine.
>
>
> A modified Fl_Double_Window.cxx works for me :
>
> in void Fl_Double_Window::flush(int eraseoverlay) {
>
> line
>
> Might be worth trying with non-zero dimensions, just to see if that
> makes any different here...
>
> e.g. try;MyWin() : T(5,5,90,90) {}
>
Works fine.
A modified Fl_Double_Window.cxx works for me :
in void Fl_Double_Window::flush(int eraseoverlay) {
line 345-348 or near, I had a ch
> I have no local access.
OK - that's a pity, it will surely make diagnosis harder!
I don't have the bits to recreate your setup, so this is all going to be
guesswork and fishing.
Maybe someone clever will step up and fix it!
> The problem happens on the Fl_Double_Window (probably due to
> a
>
> OK, that's interesting.=20
>
> (Though I guess it does not fully preclude the possibility that it is an
> X-server issue, if there's some sort of weird 32/64 thing going on or...
> Hmm...)
>
> Anyway, does it exhibit the same misbehaviour run locally on the
> machine? Is it only via Exceed tha
> > > Don't know, I am using a Red Hat 5.5, 64 bits, through Exceed.
> > > I will check tomorrow.
> >
> > Exceed? Running on a Windows host? Hmm, I wonder if that's
> the problem?
> >
> > Have you tried another server (I like Xming much better
> than Exceed on =
> > WIndows hosts these days, had
> > Don't know, I am using a Red Hat 5.5, 64 bits, through Exceed.
> > I will check tomorrow.
>
> Exceed? Running on a Windows host? Hmm, I wonder if that's the problem?
>
> Have you tried another server (I like Xming much better than Exceed on =
> WIndows hosts these days, had all sorts of weird
10 matches
Mail list logo
