Today I learnt that _NET_WM_STATE_STICKY means something else than I
previously thought.
ICCCM and EWMH support virtual desktops that are larger than the actual
screen. The idea is that one can scroll through this virtual desktop,
which means that e.g. all windows move to the left, so one can see the
windows that are further to the right.
_NET_WM_STATE_STICKY indicates that a window is sticky. This means that
it does not scroll with the virtual desktop, but instead sticks to its
current position.
In AwesomeWM, we use a different definition. A sticky window is always
visible, even when it is not tagged with any of the currently selected
tags. This behaviour is indicated in EWMH with a special value of
_NET_WM_DESKTOP. This commit updates the code to actually set this
special value.
This fixes attaching tabs in Google Chrome when the "target window" is
sticky (in the AwesomeWM sense).
Fixes: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/2652
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
No idea what "If the client has multiple classes" is supposed to refer
to, but this commit gets rid of that reference. Also, this commit
clarifies how to get the class and instance out of xprop.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
Until now there wasn't much documentation available about how to use
these properties. With the new work on `awful.spawn` that rely more and
more on `awful.rules` integration, it is worth fixing.
This commit add a new documentation section and a future commit will
aggregate them to generate an index.
Previously, this function overwrote the value of its argument with the
result. After this change, the function merely changes the given
variable by the calculated argument.
Thus, the old behaviour is achieved by setting the variable to zero
before the call, which all callers already did. However, for most
callers this change means that a temporary variable can be removed and
instead xwindow_translate_for_gravity() will directly change the target
variable.
No change in behaviour intended.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
There are two ways in which the input focus can change: Lua can request
a change and the X11 server can inform us that the input focus changed
(because some application changed it).
In the first case, we still have to inform the X11 server about the
desired change, in the second case we must not to avoid races due to
X11's asynchronous nature.
However, there was a case where we screwed up: When a focus change is
still pending, meaning that Lua assigned the focus elsewhere, but we
have not yet sent this focus change to the X11 server, we could get an
event from the X11 server telling us that the focus changed. To make
sure that the pending focus change is not lost, we sent the focus change
out in this case (call to client_focus_refresh() in
event_handle_focusin()). After sending out this pending call, we updated
the internal state to record that whatever the X11 server just told us
had the focus. The intention was that our just sent-out focus change
will cause the X11 server to send a new event and our to-be-focused
client then has the focus.
However, if the pending focus change was for a client which only showed
up in this event loop iteration, the client was still banned. This means
that client_focus_refresh() would call client_unban() to be able to give
the focus to this client. However, since awesome (partly) allows to
"focus" currently banned clients, client_unban() recorded that there is
a pending focus change. This caused confusion later on.
In this specific bug, a main window opened a dialog, and when this
dialog was closed, a new dialog window was opened immediately. When the
first dialog was closed, Lua (the focus history) gave the input focus to
the main window. Now, a new dialog showed up and Lua focused it. Next,
we received the event from the X11 server telling us that the main
window was focused. Because there was still a pending focus change to
the new dialog window, event_handle_focusin() called
client_focus_refresh() to send out this focus change. This set
globalconf.focus.need_update to false and continued. However, because
the new dialog only just now appeared, it was still banned, meaning that
client_focus_refresh() had to call client_unban(). This set
globalconf.focus.need_update to true. Thus, when client_focus_refresh()
returned, globalconf.focus.need_update was incorrectly true. Next,
event_handle_focusin() recorded that the main window had the focus.
Thus, it now appeared as if there was a pending focus change for the
main window. Next, we got the event from the X11 server telling us that
the dialog is now focused, and because focus.need_update was set,
awesome now send out a focus change request for the main window.
Fix this race by unsetting globalconf.focus.need_update at the end of
client_focus_refresh() and not at the beginning, thus making sure that
client_unban() cannot set this flag again.
Fixes: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/2220
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
When a window has a WM_TRANSIENT_FOR property that is later unset,
awesome would still keep c.transient_for pointing to the previous
"parent client". This commit fixes that.
First, property_update_wm_transient_for() is fixed so that it unsets
c->transient_for_window if the WM_TRANSIENT_FOR property is deleted.
Additionally, this then calls client_find_transient_for() to update the
c->transient_for pointer.
Secondly (and a bit unrelated), this changes client_find_transient_for()
so that it always sets c->transient_for. Previously, if updating this
property would introduce a cycle in the transient_for relation, it would
just leave c->transient_for with its old value. After this change, it
gets explicitly set to NULL instead.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
This makes motif wm hints available on clients as c.motif_wm_hints.
Actually interpreting all the values is up to Lua. The definition of the
necessary properties is taken from motif.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
The getters for properties already get the object as their second
argument, so there is no need to get the object again from Lua.
Fixes: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/2299
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
When a new client appears, we reparent its window into a window of our
choice so that we can add decorations. However, windows can be difficult
making the reparenting fail. For example, some snapshots of GTK+ set a
parent-relative background, which means that its parent windows have to
have the same depth as the window itself. This makes reparenting fail if
transparency is used/supported.
Make the failure mode... different, by checking if reparenting
succeeded. If it failed, we print an error message and unmanage the
window immediately. This means that those GTK+ windows just do not
appear at all, instead of behaving weirdly.
This idea of this patch came from i3.
Related-to: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/2279
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
_NET_WM_STATE could contain _NET_WM_STATE_HIDDEN, which we interpret as
minimized. Minimized clients have WM_STATE set to WM_STATE_ICONIC, but
the code in client_manage() would later overwrite this to
WM_STATE_NORMAL.
Fix this by setting the initial WM_STATE_NORMAL by doing so before
processing _NET_WM_STATE.
Fixes: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/2095
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
The code here made sure that clients were not moved outside of the root
window. However, that's not enough, because clients can still end up
inside the root window, but outside of anything that is visible in some
output. Thus, just remove this.
Related-to: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/318
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
Aborting the process is sometimes a bit harsh for a failed assertion.
This adds a non-fatal assert() macro called "check()" and uses it in
some places where we might be able to survive the error.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
Every call to client_ignore_enterleave_events() must be paired with a
following call to client_restore_enterleave_events(). In between these
two calls, no other calls to client_ignore_enterleave_events() is
allowed.
The code in banning_refresh() sometimes broke these rules. This can
happen because the code causes signals to be emitted and Lua code can do
basically anything.
Fix this by moving the calls into the called functions.
Fixes: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/1746
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
This adds c.icon_sizes which is a table containing the width and height
of each available icon. With c:get_icon(i), Lua can query the i-th icon
as a lightuserdata.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
Clients can provide various icons in their _NET_WM_ICON property. Up to
now we only saved a single one, now we save all of them.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
Before this commit, do this:
c.maximize_hoizontal = true
c.maximize = true
c.maximize = false
assert(c.maximize_hoizontal)
Would not work because the states were not preserved individually.
This commit fixes that. Awesome wont be confused about it's own
state anymore.
This may seem pointless, but when it come to undoing these
maximizations, it was ambiguous.
Before 4.0, maximizing could only be done in 2 operations.
4.0 add an unified way, but kept doing 2 operations. The old
Lua EWMH code to serialize the 2 operations was dropped when
the codepath was simplified and replaced by a generic version
in awful.placement. However this version never implemented
combining multiple mementos into 1.
This commit unify the maximize C code, drop the ugly macro
template and actually fixes a couple more issues that were
caused because request::geometry was sent twice.
I explicitly did not add client_shape_input property since querying the
input shape of the client window seems useless to me.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
These warnings might help catching some problems in the future. These
could be asserts, but printing a warning is a lot nicer than dying.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
X11 does not allow to resize a window to size 0x0. Also, there are some
possibilities of integer overflows in our case. We tried to handle this
already, but there was a loop-hole: If the too-small-value is only
produced after applying size hints, then this was not caught.
Fix this by applying size hints before checking if the resulting size is
valid. However, this means some check needs to be duplicated to handle
the possibility of integer underflows while applying size hints.
Helps-with: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/1340
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
The code in luaA_client_swap() is incorrect, because
luaA_object_emit_signal() already pops the arguments to the signal.
Still, the code here tried to remove the arguments from the Lua stack
again, thereby corrupting the stack (removing more items than there are
in the stack).
Normally, popping more things from the stack than it has entries
silently corrupts the Lua stack. Apparently this doesn't necessarily
cause any immediate issues, because this code has been broken since nine
months and no one noticed. This mistakes was introduced in commit
55190646.
This issue was only noticed by accident. Thus, this commit also adds a
small integration test that exercises this bug. This test catches the
issue, but only on Travis, because there we are building our own version
of Lua 5.3 and that one has assertions enabled.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
It does not provide much value. The version number is already known to
ldoc globally in the "description" variable.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
Daniel sees a short flicker of his wallpaper when he closes a client.
This happens because the window is destroyed immediately, but other
clients are re-arranged only shortly later. In the mean time, the X
server updates the display and repaints the root window (= wallpaper
becomes visible).
Work around this by delaying the destruction of frame windows to the end
of the current main loop iteration. This means that we first update the
position of all other windows and later destroy the window that was
actually closed.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
There are some situations where we do things that can make the mouse pointer
enter another window. We do not want to react to these "self inflicted" mouse
enter and leave events, because they aren't "real" (= generated by the user).
Before this commit, this is done by going through all windows and toggling the
"please send us enter and leave events"-bit on them. This becomes slower when
many windows are visible and floods the server with requests.
This commit changes this to a constant-time logic. Each event contains the
sequence number of the last request that the X11 server handled. Thus, we just
remember the right sequence numbers and ignore any events that comes in whose
sequence number falls into the ignored range.
In detail, we keep a list of "begin" and "end" sequence numbers and ignore any
enter and leave events that fall in this range. If we get any event with a
sequence number higher than "end", we remove this pair from the list, since it
is no longer needed.
To generate these pairs, we use a GrabServer request in
client_ignore_enterleave_events(). This gives us a sequence number and makes
sure that nothing else besides us can cause events. The server is ours! In
client_restore_enterleave_events(), we first do a NoOperation request to
generate the sequence number for the end of the pair and then do UngrabServer.
Any event that is generated after UngrabServer will have at least the sequence
number of the UngrabServer request and thus no longer fails between begin and
end.
Fixes: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/1107
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
This commit makes the function only call client_ignore_enterleave_events() when
it actually has to. Since we expect that most of the time, no client's geometry
is changed, this means that most of the time this function is not called.
Fixes: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/1107
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
This should "protect" the user from some stupidities that Lua code might be
doing that e.g. makes a client jump to another position and then immediately
back to where it was before. Only the last change in a single main loop
iteration will actually have any effect.
Original idea by Daniel here: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/pull/174
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
Uli Schlachter
Uli Schlachter
Emmanuel Lepage Vallee
mergify[bot]
Daniel Hahler
mergify-bot
Daniel Hahler
Luke Bonham
Vitja Makarov