Re: [dev] dwm-5.8.1 / dmenu-4.1.1

From: Kris Maglione <>
Date: Sat, 29 May 2010 15:32:44 -0400

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 07:59:39PM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
>On 29 May 2010 19:17, Anselm R Garbe <> wrote:
>> On 29 May 2010 18:18, Kris Maglione <> wrote:
>>>On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 01:12:15PM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
>>>The getfullscreen bit is probably not necessary in most cases. The rest of
>>>the clientmessage function is a hack, because I don't know the dwm
>>>sourcecode well enough to do it properly. It's just to show what's required.
>>I got a similar impression when reverting the changeset that the EWMH
>>fullscreen handling was incomplete.
>>Overall my aim is trying to prevent using too much EWMH magic, though
>>as things look more clients seem to fully depend on EWMH nowadays for
>>fullscreen handling, like chromium.

I think the intention of the patch wasn't to support EWMH
fullscreen so much as to tell apps that they were in fullscreen
mode. Without it, chromium went fullscreen fine, but it still
showed its tab bar, etc. A lot of apps (when the WM supports
EWMH) only show their fullscreen UI when they have the EWMH
fullscreen hint set on their window. It's actually a good thing
in a lot of cases, because if you manually force the apps to
fullscreen from the WM side they tend to hide their decorations

>Btw your patch contained a weird getstateproperty() incompliance with
>the missing Window w argument... dunno must be some cut'n'paste issue
>I believe.

Oh, that's strange. It definitely compiled on this end. I might
have hit undo before I committed or something.

Kris Maglione
It's a curious thing about our industry: not only do we not learn from
our mistakes, we also don't learn from our successes.
	--Keith Braithwaite
Received on Sat May 29 2010 - 19:32:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sat May 29 2010 - 19:36:01 UTC