On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 09:40:22AM +0100 I heard the voice of
Frank Steiner, and lo! it spake thus:
>
> I don't think it's a good idea to insist on doing sth. different
> than any other window manager, especially if it makes X11 tools fail
> only in ctwm.
Well, that _is_ a pretty odd and fragile heuristic it's running with.
Though apparently a more successful one than I'd expect. Amusingly,
that's in the neighborhood of the sort of capabilities the whole EWMH
thing is supposed to better enable; it'd be interesting for somebody
to port (or perhaps more like, rewrite) xwit to be EWMH-aware.
> Is this a single patch than I can remove? We can't go without xwit
> on out chair, there are too many scripts relying on it.
It certainly seems a reasonable thing to add a config var for. I'll
put it on my list. There are a lot of windows in a lot of different
places, but I think just diking out the name on the frame would get
you through the day for now. e.g.,
=== modified file 'add_window.c'
--- add_window.c 2017-03-22 22:41:25 +0000
+++ add_window.c 2017-11-14 07:30:28 +0000
@@ -1522,7 +1522,7 @@
tmp_win->frame_bw,
Scr->d_depth, CopyFromParent,
Scr->d_visual, valuemask,
&attributes);
- XStoreName(dpy, tmp_win->frame, "CTWM frame");
+ //XStoreName(dpy, tmp_win->frame, "CTWM frame");
}
--
Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | [email protected]
Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/
On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.
