-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 control: forwarded -1 https://gitlab.xfce.org/xfce/xfwm4/-/issues/867
On Fri, 2025-06-20 at 21:38 +0200, Adam Chyła wrote: > Hey Yves-Alexis, > > thank you for your response. > > On 20.06.2025 o 08:59, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > > Could you report this directly upstream because while I think it might be > > worth double-checking for division by zero, there's something fishy here > > (maybe with GDK as you said) and I think upstream would be better to check > > that. > > Reported to the upstream: https://gitlab.xfce.org/xfce/xfwm4/-/issues/867 > > Thanks! > On 20.06.2025 o 08:59, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > > Also not that in my case the monitor_width seems wrong (1920×1080 is the > > size > > of my laptop display but I'm currently docked to a 3840x2160 display which > > should be used for the calculation). > > This seems to be intentional, the code selects the minimum screen width: Ah good point. Not sure why because here the laptop screen is *disabled* (so I think shouldn't be used when calculating a size for display). > > > > On 20.06.2025 o 08:59, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > > Maybe it's something similar for you (in case you have a smaller display > > attached)? > > Unfortunately, this is not my case. I don't have a smaller display. > So yeah there's definitely something fishy with a monitor size of 103px. Maybe a scaling issue (I noticed somewhere that the Scaling factor is used). Regards, - -- Yves-Alexis -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEE8vi34Qgfo83x35gF3rYcyPpXRFsFAmhWYIAACgkQ3rYcyPpX RFsJoAf/d+CmgKy52JqOe2tztu9kj06SwuFHcm4Co8NhTwLFIZfoWRLO3sr7cyZN YO8NOSq0e12XI/2QQe2MdDFhnSOv5LUeV/lgqCeLMhr4S58siuiQIIQz9tzI1M1L y58RNI0utYSU2lXXV6Rb/Bvzh3R4eSA+TzA6aYJxQUtv50ucec/ZxFeXqw8wET6T ibROlD3D1yLtP1jSugGZQT28abpC2BAl4iU/qnEzCjXO2rK+yLqZex1tmzW517HD ygH83vGwlraR/xJCz7NLSj51lmCDq3lNR4aqOOHqUSOTuCW0llE6Cr+1oKaYwc7a oEUxDx7RJx64oM+o7qz+wAbqlpe7WQ== =g1uF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
