From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: frame auto-unmaximized Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:33:25 +0900 Message-ID: <87d48duhmy.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <4A520B4D.30807@gnu.org> <4A521194.9090006@swipnet.se> <1f77704b0907060911q5f314033ib26ae3c77117c2c8@mail.gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1246948504 17589 80.91.229.12 (7 Jul 2009 06:35:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 06:35:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Jan =?iso-8859-1?Q?Dj=E4rv?= , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Sam Steingold Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 07 08:34:56 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MO4GV-0001Rh-U7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:34:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60348 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MO4GV-0007NL-4T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:34:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MO4GO-0007Jd-3h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:34:48 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MO4GG-000762-6o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:34:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37839 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MO4GG-00075k-1J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:34:40 -0400 Original-Received: from mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.223]:33303) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MO4GC-0002LP-11; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:34:36 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53CDB1537B7; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 15:34:20 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 33D6312953C; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 15:33:26 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <1f77704b0907060911q5f314033ib26ae3c77117c2c8@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: VM 8.0.12-devo-585 under 21.5 (beta29) "garbanzo" 5bbff3553494 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:112122 Archived-At: Sam Steingold writes: > On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Jan Dj=E4rv wrote: > > Sam Steingold skrev: > >> > >> with the current cvs head under gnome: > >> emacs -q > >> click on the "maximize" button (upper right corner, 2nd from right). > >> the emacs frame is maximized. > >> C-M- to go to the next workspace > >> C-M- to go back to the emacs workspace > >> observe that the emacs frame is no longer maximized. > >> I hope this is not the intended behavior! > >> > > > > No, it sounds like a bug. =A0Are you using metacity or something else = (compiz > > perhaps)? >=20 > metacity. Metacity doesn't bother to remember that *it* maximized the app (the app of course has no power to do so), and so happily fullfils a request from the app to return to its natural size. I forget the details, but this is a particular behavior of metacity and KDE's default WM; other WMs do remember that they've maximized the window and refuse future requests unless they come from the user. I think it's more in line with user expectations if the WM remembers, but evidently Havoc thinks differently. I believe that there is a way for the WM to differentiate between a request by a program that is obeying an explicit command from the user to request a window configuration, and a program that is simply making a request based on widget resources. The WM of course should respect the former, and ignore the latter if it has its own mandate from the user. Again I forget the details, but it may be that metacity ignores this difference.