! Please note that this is a snapshot of our old Bugzilla server, which is read only since May 29, 2020. Please go to gitlab.xfce.org for our new server !
oddities with un-iconifiable windows
Status:
RESOLVED: INVALID

Comments

Description Brian J. Tarricone (not reading bugmail) 2004-11-02 02:16:19 CET
For some reason I can't minimise the gaim away message window after I set an
away message.  I'm fairly certain this worked last night, but stopped working
after I updated xfwm4 this afternoon to test the fix for bug 434.

The window has no "stick" button and no "minimise" button.  "Hide" in the window
menu is greyed-out, and selecting "Hide" from the taskbar's menu does nothing.
Comment 1 Brian J. Tarricone (not reading bugmail) 2004-11-02 02:18:00 CET
Created attachment 87 
xprop output

I note that it doesn't appear to have _NET_WM_ACTION_MINIMIZE in
_NET_WM_ALLOWED_ACTIONS, but, as I said, it worked yesterday...
Comment 2 Olivier Fourdan editbugs 2004-11-02 09:13:29 CET
Well, that's not a bug, that's on purpose...

The window is of type NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE_DIALOG and it sets its WM_CLIENT_LEADER
field.

The standard doesn't say anything about that, but Metacity/GNOME treat this as a
regular transient for group (ie it considers the dialog as a transient by
default) and now xfwm4 does the same for consistency (some Gnome apps just
expect that behaviour).

BTW, it's worth noting that the whole "transient for group" thing is not really
standard, but's it's been like that for years in many window managers. Usually a
transient for group is a window that sets its transient_for field to the root
window, it becomes transient to all the windows that belong to the same group
(ie that share the same group leader) 

And at last, from a usability stand point, I think it makes perfectly sense for
gaim to sets its away window like that. It's not supposed to be the kind of
windows that stays for long (the user sets his away message and close the window)

PS: Brian, I'm missing the 'NOTABUG' option, what's the best in that case, does
'INVALID' apply?

Bug #447

Reported by:
Brian J. Tarricone (not reading bugmail)
Reported on: 2004-11-02
Last modified on: 2009-07-14

People

Assignee:
Olivier Fourdan
CC List:
0 users

Version

Attachments

xprop output (24.21 KB, text/plain)
2004-11-02 02:18 CET , Brian J. Tarricone (not reading bugmail)
no flags

Additional information