On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 10:24, garbeam <garb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 24 May 2011 21:44, Bogdan Ionuț <bog...@punctweb.ro> wrote:
> > I find out it's related to commit 40ea9ad70440, and this dirty patch
> seems
> > to fix my issue.
> >
> > --- a/dwm.c 2011-05-24 23:38:52.799999994 +0300
> > +++ b/dwm.c 2011-05-24 23:39:40.543000014 +0300
> > @@ -582,8 +582,8 @@ clientmessage(XEvent *e) {
> > }
> > else if(cme->message_type == netatom[NetActiveWindow]) {
> > if(!ISVISIBLE(c)) {
> > - c->mon->seltags ^= 1;
> > - c->mon->tagset[c->mon->seltags] = c->tags;
> > + Arg a = { .ui = c->tags };
> > + view(&a);
> > }
> > pop(c);
> > }
>
> I don't really see a big difference here. Do you run this in a multi
> monitor setup by any chance?
> I imagine problems with this approach in case c->mon != selmon.
>
> Best regards,
> --garbeam
>
>
Hi. No, I'm running a single monitor setup. The problem is with the pertag
patch, which uses view() to apply the layout and mfact when switching to a
new tag. Without this, it's just switching to the new tag without applying
the layout, mfact, etc for that tag.
