Re: [hackers] [PATCH] Add a configuration option for fullscreen locking

From: Christopher Witt <>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 20:54:34 +0200

On 7/13/21 8:33 PM, Sebastian LaVine wrote:
> On 7/13/21 2:04 PM, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 11:44:16PM +0200, Quentin Rameau wrote:
>>> Some people are annoyed to have this new behaviour forced for some
>>> application which use fake fullscreen.
>>> ---
>>>   config.def.h | 1 +
>>>   dwm.c        | 2 +-
>>>   2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> ...
>> For the archives: this was discussed on IRC (so not ignored or
>> anything).
>> If there are more people having issues with the behaviour introduced
>> in commit
>> 67d76bdc68102df976177de351f65329d8683064 then I'll gladly hear it.
> I am the "some people" that Quentin mentioned above :)
> I brought this up in the #suckless channel yesterday, when I was
> having a problem with Firefox: When I entered into fullscreen mode, I
> could no longer switch windows with my Alt+J/K keybindings. I use the
> fakefullscreen patch, so for me fullscreen windows just expand as much
> as possible.
> Quentin (quinq), Ingvix and I discussed this on IRC. To me, this
> behavior seems rather unintuitive and therefore should not be included
> in mainline. To my knowledge, it isn't documented anywhere except the
> commit message, which is:
>> Do not allow focus to drift from fullscreen client via focusstack()
>> It generally doesn't make much sense to allow focusstack() to navigate
>> away from the selected fullscreen client, as you can't even see which
>> client you're selecting behind it.
>> I have had this up for a while on the wiki as a separate patch[0], but
>> it seems reasonable to avoid this behaviour in dwm mainline, since I'm
>> struggling to think of any reason to navigate away from a fullscreen
>> client other than a mistake.
>> 0:
> It may be that people aren't likely to want to switch windows when
> they have a fullscreen window open -- again, assuming that they aren't
> using fakefullscreen. But to assume that by default? To assume that
> the user *must* have either pressed Alt+J/K by mistake? In what other
> context is the user's inputs explicitly ignored?
> The scenario mentioned by Ingvix on IRC was that it was annoying to
> switch from a window they had forgotten was in fullscreen, and then
> have to navigate back to their fullscreen window without seeing what
> windows they have selected. Even if this wasn't easily remedied by
> just pressing the opposite direction navigation keybinding, in my
> opinion this is the sort of user error that should be addressed by a
> patch, not in dwm by default. It seems a core tenet of suckless's
> development is to assume that the user knows what they are doing. This
> behavior contradicts that.
> Anyway, it's been more than a year since 67d76bd was merged, so I
> understand if there is hesitance to revert it outright. I think that
> this patch Quentin submitted is a good compromise. If merged, I will
> update fakefullscreen to set the new lockfullscreen variable to 0.
> ---
> Sebastian LaVine |

So now i know where this came from  ;) I would like to have that option
toggleable in the config as well, so +1 from me.

Best wishes,


Received on Tue Jul 13 2021 - 20:54:34 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Jul 13 2021 - 21:36:31 CEST