On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 09:12:00PM +0000, Thomas Adam wrote: > On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 04:34:17PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > > There appears to be a discrepency between how FvwmIdent calculates the > > > geometry of the specified window, in relation to, say, how xwininfo > > > calculates it. In both cases, xwininfo's report of the geometry of a > > > window is correct. You just have to use a test case of: > > > > > > xterm -g some_geometry_string > > > > > > for the numbers from xwininfo and FvwmIdent to see what's happening. I > > > don't have time to look into why at the moment, I wish I did. > > > > Fixed. > > Are you sure? There is a difference in the numbers between the > FvwmIdent module shipped with 2.5.19 and the updated on in CVS, but > they're still reporting erroneous numbers in the geometry string that I > can tell.
Um, yes I'm quite sure (apart from the new bug I introduced with the "fix". > Here's an example: > > xterm -g 80x24+0+0 > > Places xterm in the top-left corner of the current page. If you run > FvwmIdent (from 2.5.19, say) on that window, you'll get a reported > geometry of: > > 484x316+0+0 That's the geometry in pixels. > Of course, it _should_ be 80x24+0+0. If you were to then issue a > command of: > > xterm -g 484x316+0+0 > > That is going to obviously give you one huge XTerm. :) You're looking at the wrong lines of the output. The numbers you are looking for are in the "Geometry:"-line near the bottom of the window. > You get much the same result from the FvwmIdent module in CVS as over an > hour ago. Ciao Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Dominik Vogt, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
