On 29 Jun 2001 08:57:43 -0700, Danek Duvall wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 08:39:09AM -0400, Dan Espen wrote:
>
> > The "Next [*] Focus" command violates that rule, but unclutter fixes it
> > up. If you want to focus on a new window with either of these focus
> > models, warptowindow should
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 08:39:09AM -0400, Dan Espen wrote:
> The "Next [*] Focus" command violates that rule, but unclutter fixes it
> up. If you want to focus on a new window with either of these focus
> models, warptowindow should be used.
One inconvenient thing about warptowindow is that ther
%% Lorenz Minder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
lm> I have implemented a new Style, NoMouseFocusWithoutMotion which
lm> causes windows not to get focus because of the mouse pointer, if
lm> it hasn't moved before.
Without commenting one way or another on whether this is a good style or
not, you
Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > [...]
>
> The problem is this:
>
> When unclutter hides the pointer, it creates an invisible
> subwindow to the window that currently contains the pointer.
> Since the pointer generates an EnterNofity on the new window and
> unclutter sends a synthetic EnterNotify on its p
Dominik Vogt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 04:57:53PM +0200, Lorenz Minder wrote:
> > I don't actually think this is release critical, but I think it should
> > probably not be me to decide that, therefore I figured it would be
> > better to mention that anyway.
> >
> > I h
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 04:57:53PM +0200, Lorenz Minder wrote:
> I don't actually think this is release critical, but I think it should
> probably not be me to decide that, therefore I figured it would be
> better to mention that anyway.
>
> I have another problem with unclutter. Here's a minimal
Lorenz Minder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Paul D. Smith wrote:
> > There was an unclutter problem I reported back about then, that was
> > fixed almost immediately.
>
> No, your problem was in May, not June, according to my archive. (That's
> BTW why I entitled it `Yet another ...'.) Moreover th
Paul D. Smith wrote:
> There was an unclutter problem I reported back about then, that was
> fixed almost immediately.
No, your problem was in May, not June, according to my archive. (That's
BTW why I entitled it `Yet another ...'.) Moreover the bug descriptions
don't match.
> You say you are usi
There was an unclutter problem I reported back about then, that was
fixed almost immediately.
You say you are using a snap from early June; the very first thing to do
when you find a problem, well before bothering to spend any time
debugging it yourself, is to try the latest code.
If it still hap
