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

From: Sebastian LaVine <>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2021 11:37:58 -0400

On 7/14/21 7:41 AM, Chris Down wrote:
> Hey folks,
> Laslo Hunhold writes:
>> count me in in that regard. If an application (most likely a game) wants
>> exclusive fullscreen, it can capture the mouse in the window. I always
>> set it like this in wine and have had no problems with that, and it
>> still allows workspace-switching.
>> For what it's worth, in my humble opinion dwm should always guarantee
>> that you can switch workspaces. "Exclusive" fullscreen is a hack as we
>> know from slock.
> Probably worth me chiming in as the commit author :-)
> In my case, a tangible problem exists for cases where, for example, mpv
> is playing a video full screen. If one then accidentally performs a
> focusstack (as I have many times) then they cannot possibly see which
> window is being selected, and it's somewhat cumbersome to recover focus
> to the foreground in order to regain control.

Would you mind describing how you accidentally perform a focusstack?
What keybindings do you have it set to that makes this so easy to do
without intending to? Or do you mean that you intentionally press the
focusstack keybindings, but forget that a window is in fullscreen?

> Looking at the conversation, it seems like the concern is about
> interaction with the fakefullscreen[0] patch, if I understand correctly.
That is how I came across this issue, personally. But to me, the bigger
issue is that there is *no reason* for this behavior to exist except the
assumption that a user's explicit inputs *must* be accidental and
therefore should be ignored. This is unintuitive and undocumented, and
just a Bad Idea that dwm shouldn't implement. But I digress.

> As I understand it, the behaviour in mainline makes sense with stock
> dwm, just not with this patch. If that's the case, can't one just change
> the behaviour as part of the fakefullscreen patch on the wiki? Or maybe
> I'm misunderstanding the use case in question?
> 0:

I have now just done that. I sent a patch updating fakefullscreen to use
the new lockfullscreen variable introduced in this patch. I didn't
realize this, but there was another version of fakefullscreen added in
May that reverted your commit, which is the effective behavior
introduced by this patch. However, it seems this option is supported by
others, even those who may not use fakefullscreen, so it is good that it
is in mainline now, if your patch is to be mainline behavior as well.

Sebastian LaVine |

Received on Wed Jul 14 2021 - 17:37:58 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Jul 14 2021 - 17:48:30 CEST