On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 03:23:23PM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> Having said this, please provide a decent patch as attachment.
>
> BR,
> Anselm
>
> On 24 January 2016 at 15:22, Anselm R Garbe <garbeam_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Omar,
> >
> > On 24 January 2016 at 01:10, Omar Sandoval <osandov_AT_osandov.com> wrote:
> >> ---
> >> This has been discussed a couple of times [1][2], and I think it's about time
> >> that it gets fixed. I noticed this issue because xfce4-screenshooter -w, which
> >> is supposed to screenshot the active window, doesn't work with dwm. After
> >> digging through the source code, I found that it uses
> >> gdk_screen_get_active_window() [3]. According to the documentation, that
> >> function looks at _NET_ACTIVE_WINDOW, which dwm sets. Looking at the GDK source
> >> code, I found that gdk_x11_screen_supports_net_wm_hint() [4] returns false for
> >> _NET_ACTIVE_WINDOW on dwm regardless of the value of _NET_SUPPORTED because
> >> _NET_SUPPORTING_WM_CHECK is not set (see fetch_net_wm_check_window() [5]).
> >>
> >> tl;dr Not setting _NET_SUPPORTING_WM_CHECK breaks real applications, and dwm is
> >> already going through the trouble of setting several EWMH atoms, so we should
> >> fix this.
> >>
> >> 1: http://lists.suckless.org/dev/1411/24636.html
> >> 2: http://lists.suckless.org/dev/1505/26735.html
> >> 3: https://developer.gnome.org/gdk2/stable/GdkScreen.html#gdk-screen-get-active-window
> >> 4: https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/tree/gdk/x11/gdkscreen-x11.c?h=3.19.7#n1635
> >> 5: https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/tree/gdk/x11/gdkscreen-x11.c?h=3.19.7#n1580
> >>
> >> dwm.c | 12 +++++++++++-
> >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/dwm.c b/dwm.c
> >> index ff7e096f61fc..7c12796419ca 100644
> >> --- a/dwm.c
> >> +++ b/dwm.c
> >> _AT_@ -60,7 +60,7 @@
> >> /* enums */
> >> enum { CurNormal, CurResize, CurMove, CurLast }; /* cursor */
> >> enum { SchemeNorm, SchemeSel, SchemeLast }; /* color schemes */
> >> -enum { NetSupported, NetWMName, NetWMState,
> >> +enum { NetSupported, NetSupportingWMCheck, NetWMName, NetWMState,
> >> NetWMFullscreen, NetActiveWindow, NetWMWindowType,
> >> NetWMWindowTypeDialog, NetClientList, NetLast }; /* EWMH atoms */
> >> enum { WMProtocols, WMDelete, WMState, WMTakeFocus, WMLast }; /* default atoms */
> >> _AT_@ -1574,6 +1574,7 @@ setup(void)
> >> wmatom[WMTakeFocus] = XInternAtom(dpy, "WM_TAKE_FOCUS", False);
> >> netatom[NetActiveWindow] = XInternAtom(dpy, "_NET_ACTIVE_WINDOW", False);
> >> netatom[NetSupported] = XInternAtom(dpy, "_NET_SUPPORTED", False);
> >> + netatom[NetSupportingWMCheck] = XInternAtom(dpy, "_NET_SUPPORTING_WM_CHECK", False);
> >> netatom[NetWMName] = XInternAtom(dpy, "_NET_WM_NAME", False);
> >> netatom[NetWMState] = XInternAtom(dpy, "_NET_WM_STATE", False);
> >> netatom[NetWMFullscreen] = XInternAtom(dpy, "_NET_WM_STATE_FULLSCREEN", False);
> >> _AT_@ -1806,6 +1807,8 @@ updatebars(void)
> >> .background_pixmap = ParentRelative,
> >> .event_mask = ButtonPressMask|ExposureMask
> >> };
> >> + Atom utf8string;
> >> + utf8string = XInternAtom(dpy, "UTF8_STRING", False);
> >> for (m = mons; m; m = m->next) {
> >> if (m->barwin)
> >> continue;
> >> _AT_@ -1814,7 +1817,14 @@ updatebars(void)
> >> CWOverrideRedirect|CWBackPixmap|CWEventMask, &wa);
> >> XDefineCursor(dpy, m->barwin, cursor[CurNormal]->cursor);
> >> XMapRaised(dpy, m->barwin);
> >> + XChangeProperty(dpy, m->barwin, netatom[NetWMName], utf8string,
> >> + 8, PropModeReplace, (unsigned char *)"dwm", 3);
> >> }
> >> + /* it doesn't matter which bar we use for this, so just use the first one */
> >> + XChangeProperty(dpy, root, netatom[NetSupportingWMCheck], XA_WINDOW, 32,
> >> + PropModeReplace, (unsigned char *)&mons->barwin, 1);
> >> + XChangeProperty(dpy, mons->barwin, netatom[NetSupportingWMCheck], XA_WINDOW,
> >> + 32, PropModeReplace, (unsigned char *)&mons->barwin, 1);
> >> }
> >
> > To me it looks like a rather odd interpretation of wm spec that is
> > used in the gdkscreen implementation. They query
> > _NET_SUPPORTING_WM_CHECK != None for any atom that is queried through
> > gdk_x11_screen_supports_net_wm_hint().
> >
> > I think I can live with re-introducing this atom into dwm.
> > Nevertheless EWMH stinks. I did remove this handling back in 2007 btw.
> >
> > -Anselm
>
Anselm,
Thanks for the reply. I agree, the check in GDK is odd. I imagine it has
something to do with ensuring that the other EWMH atoms aren't stale.
I'm not sure if there was a specific problem with the patch from my
first email that you wanted me to fix or you just wanted it as an
attachment instead, so I've attached it. Let me know.
Thanks.
--
Omar
Received on Mon Jan 25 2016 - 08:08:40 CET