On Mon, 6 Apr 2015 13:27:23 -0700
Dima Ryazanov d...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, the logic is pretty sketchy now - if it's a shell surface, do the
error checking; otherwise, do nothing - but I don't understand the code
well enough to know if this is the expected behavior.
Should the panel just
Sure, I'll remove it then. (I was going to remove it originally - but
figured, it was useful for testing since it exposed this bug.)
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Pekka Paalanen ppaala...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2015 13:27:23 -0700
Dima Ryazanov d...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, the
Yeah, the logic is pretty sketchy now - if it's a shell surface, do the
error checking; otherwise, do nothing - but I don't understand the code
well enough to know if this is the expected behavior.
Should the panel just be a shell surface? Then we could require that the
popup's parent is a shell
This bug was introduced in commits da6ecd0cc52 and 24185e2561
I guess nobody right clicked on the panel for over a month. :)
I've CC'd Jasper and Jonas in case they haven't noticed this yet...
On 06/04/15 01:52 AM, Dima Ryazanov wrote:
It looks like the error-checking code assumes the popup's
It looks like the error-checking code assumes the popup's parent is
a shell surface - but that's not always the case.
Signed-off-by: Dima Ryazanov d...@gmail.com
---
desktop-shell/shell.c | 9 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/desktop-shell/shell.c
