I replied to Michał directly by mistake. Problem is its background setter tool, obviously.
Michał Janke <[email protected]> writes: > Wow! You really hit the spot at first shot (was it that obvious?). Why > didn't I check that earlier... > Great thanks! - the problem is, generally, solved - only now I still > wonder, which setter would be most suitable. It's obvious to me because I wrote the alpha channel code. :-) The way background pixmap is set and stored for faked-transparency is not really standard. It seems to work with almost all background setter, but I always wondered when this would break. Maybe you are using 2 differents tools to set 2 differents background, or somehow the pixmap provided to fake the transparency is corrupted. I don't know. What I know is that awesome draws correctly what it thinks is background image, so if it draws shit, that's because there's some given to it. ;-) Cheers, -- Julien Danjou // ᐰ <[email protected]> http://julien.danjou.info -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected].
