Hi On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Michael Stapelberg <mich...@i3wm.org> wrote: > Anders Aagaard <aagaa...@gmail.com> writes: >> Starting to implement the client side of this I realize it might be >> good to know the workspace of the window in question. That's easy >> enough to add. Also technically we could skip the "changed" field, as >> the "focused" field in the container will tell you the same >> information. I also wouldn't mind knowing the window class. Any >> technical reason that's not already in the Con class? > It is -- I think you're not using the "next" branch, but you should. The > "master" branch contains the latest release + bugfixes only, whereas > development happens in "next".
I actually wrote the patch on master and then rebased (and tested) on next afterwards. I didn't notice that WM_CLASS was there in next though, brilliant! I also saw the replies on the pr, and that's what I get for not checking next ;). One thing it does not have though is an event for windows that doesn't get focus. However I'm a bit uncertain about how to add that cleanly, since the event is now pushed in a very different location. I could of course add it directly from the "Request to focus con on a hidden workspace" check in handlers.c. It feels a bit bad though since the other event is sent in a very different place (x.c). Also would an event called "focus" that has "focused":False be enough to make sense api wise? Alternately I could add some code to start sending events for con_set_urgency (since focus request that fails now sets an urgency), but it wouldn't be usable for my use case unless I also add a reason for the urgency change. Which I guess could be demands_attention/focus_request and wm_hints? Not sure about that last one, where it's really coming from ;). >> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Anders Aagaard <aagaa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Sent a patch to http://cr.i3wm.org/patch/559 now. I unfortunately >>> can't get the tests running. Trying to start up a x session with >>> Xdummy seems to make the nvidia driver explode... I've done some >>> manual testing and I really don't see how this could screw up anything >>> else (.. famous last words I know). > I have the tests working with nvidia 331.67. Can you be more specific > about what breaks on your machine? It's an issue with glx, I've got an nvidia optimus setup, so I'm not terribly surprised. I could probably get it working fine by not loading glx, but it was easier to setup a VM for it. (I should point out it fails starting the X session, so it's not the test running part that's broken). > -- > Best regards, > Michael -- Best regards Anders
