Aaron Plattner writes:
> Aargh, stupid borders. I always forget about them. I guess this is why
> we have regression tests.
You just don't recall the whole original fight about borders. Left in
X11 solely for X10 compatibility. Aren't you glad we have them?
--
-keith
Aargh, stupid borders. I always forget about them. I guess this is why
we have regression tests.
On 08/18/2016 09:11 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 11:09 +0900, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, this broke two XTS tests:
>>
>> xts5@xlib9@xgetimage@7
>>
On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 11:09 +0900, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> Unfortunately, this broke two XTS tests:
>
> xts5@xlib9@xgetimage@7
> xts5@xlib9@xgetsubimage@7
Low impact, fortunately, but still unpleasant. The test in question is:
520|0 7 00020031 1 2|Assertion XGetImage-7.(A)
520|0 7 00020031 1
On 16/08/16 02:12 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-08-02 at 10:34 -0700, Aaron Plattner wrote:
>> The caller passes arguments into XaceCensorImage that are in window-relative
>> coordinates. However, the pBuf that it uses to construct a temporary pixmap
>> has
>> its origin at (x, y)
On Tue, 2016-08-02 at 10:34 -0700, Aaron Plattner wrote:
> The caller passes arguments into XaceCensorImage that are in window-relative
> coordinates. However, the pBuf that it uses to construct a temporary pixmap
> has
> its origin at (x, y) relative to the window in question. The code to
The caller passes arguments into XaceCensorImage that are in window-relative
coordinates. However, the pBuf that it uses to construct a temporary pixmap has
its origin at (x, y) relative to the window in question. The code to convert the
censor region into boxes adjusts for the Y coordinate, but