Re: strange desktop behaviour after screen resolution change
On Sun, 2003-08-10 at 18:37, Christian Marillat wrote:
> Mpiktas <vaze0348@uosis.mif.vu.lt> writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >> Few days ago I realized that there are more screen resolutions than
> >> 1024x768, so I decided to try some others out. Namely I tried
> >> 1280x1024 and 1152x864. The problem is that after resolution change I
> >> cannot use all of my desktop space. Namely I cannot to move icons out
> >> of 1024x768 space. Nautilus is responsible for desktop drawing, and
> >> desktop is my home dir. Everything else is normal, windows occupy all
> >> space, Xfree86.0.log says that virtual desktop size is the same as
> >> resolution. So I concluded that this is some gnome component
> >> problem. I tried to search the net, but did not found anything
> >> related. Has anyone experienced such problems? If someone did, what
> >> needs to be changed? Maybe there is some hidden gconf key which says
> >> use this resolution and no other? If it is a bug, against what package
> >> I should file it? Is this the right list for asking about this problem?
> >>
> >
> > I filed a bug, it's a bug #204836. There is a simple solution to this
> > problem though. Just change to metacity then to sawfish and then save
> > session when logging out (maybe just saving session is enough) and
> > voila. Everything works perfectly.
>
> This bug isn't a sawfish bug. sawfish is the same package since one
> month. The main package who has changed in the last 2 days in gtk 2.0,
> then something has changed in gtk 2.0 ?
The original poster doesn't mention any change in the last month or two
days or whatever AFAICS. What makes you so sure it's not a sawfish bug?
The workaround (BTW, the fact that there's a workaround doesn't mean
there's no bug - and what exactly does the XVideo extension have to do
with all this? *shrug*) certainly points towards sawfish IMO.
--
Earthling Michel Dänzer \ Debian (powerpc), XFree86 and DRI developer
Software libre enthusiast \ http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer
Reply to: