[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Panel woes and other peculiarities



In <[🔎] slrngtu34q.40k.nospam@sshway.ssh.pusling.com>, Sune Vuorela wrote:
>On 2009-04-09, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <bss@iguanasuicide.net> wrote:
>> Regarding the system tray:  Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's an upstream bug
>> (I= =20
>> had a few people confirm it a couple of week ago on one of the KDE lists).
>> = =20
>> The system tray seems to want to take all the extra space on the panel,
>> unl= ess=20
>> it is on a panel with the Task Manager (or possibly another expanding
>> widge= t. =20
>> I haven't gotten around to filing a bug, and just worked around it
>> locally.
>
>All widgets in panel that don't naturally have a fixed size (kmenu,
>device notifier, ...) expands as much as possible.

Yeah, that's not appropriate for the system tray.  While the system tray does 
not have a *fixed* size, it does have a *natural* size based on the number of 
icons currently in it.  It also doesn't *use* any of that extra space; the 
tray icons are not resized or rearranged when it grows; they remain tightly 
packed against the left/top.  If it would usefully use the extra space, 
expanding would make sense, but it doesn't.

The current behavior is a regression from KDE 3.  In KDE 3, I could have a 
panel that resized as needed to be exactly the size required by a few quick-
launch icons and any system tray icons I might have.  It would grow if either 
I manually added a new quick launch icon or if a program created a system tray 
icon; It would shrink if system try icons were closed or if I manually removed 
a quick launch icon In KDE 4, the panel doesn't shrink or grow properly if it 
contains only Icon widgets and the System Tray widget.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                   ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net                   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy         `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/                    \_/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: