From dm@blackamp.de Wed Jan 29 19:03:11 2014 Received: (at submit) by bugs.x2go.org; 29 Jan 2014 18:03:12 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on ymir.das-netzwerkteam.de X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 Received: from mail.fysik.lu.se (mail.fysik.lu.se [130.235.185.27]) by ymir (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB26B5DA6C for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 19:03:11 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 18924 invoked by uid 89); 29 Jan 2014 19:03:10 +0100 Received: (simscan 1.4.1 ppid 18918 pid 18921 t 0.1199s) (scanners: attach: 1.4.1 clamav: 0.97.8/m:55/d:17992); 29 Jan 0114 18:03:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO forrest.astro.lu.se) (mic@astro.lu.se@213.239.254.222) by 0 with ESMTPA; 29 Jan 2014 19:03:10 +0100 Received: from dmichalik by forrest.astro.lu.se with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1W8ZTW-00044P-Q0; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 19:02:58 +0100 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 19:02:58 +0100 From: Daniel Michalik To: Mike Gabriel Cc: Daniel Michalik , 417@bugs.x2go.org, submit@bugs.x2go.org Subject: Re: Bug#417: Two screens, wrong screen used for limits of positioning context menus Message-ID: <20140129180258.GA15241@forrest.astro.lu.se> References: <20140128153552.GA6148@forrest.astro.lu.se> <20140129121605.Horde.2SgHez-ZApyRzdaUV9SN4A1@mail.das-netzwerkteam.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140129121605.Horde.2SgHez-ZApyRzdaUV9SN4A1@mail.das-netzwerkteam.de> Priority: normal User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Hi Mike, On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 12:16:05PM +0000, Mike Gabriel wrote: > this is a very special behaviour on a special setup. We will not be > able to track this down soon, I am sorry. We may look at it for a > certain amount of project sponsoring. Please let me know if that is > an option for you (or your company in case you use X2Go at work). Thank you for your answer. I cannot help you with sponsoring unfortunately. However I did some further investigations and I believe this issue might be more general than it looks like, I think it applies to all multiple screen scenarios where session type is single application. It should therefore be much easier to reproduce than anticipated. I retested this without a portrait screen but rather a classical dual monitor setup, that is two landscape monitors next to each other. At same resolution ("identical screens") there is no problem with the context menu placement when being close to the bottom edge. But the placement is wrong when being close to the right edge of the left screen. With different resolutions of the screens the behaviour is always consistent with the larger vertical resolution. My suggestion for the error source is that the bottom right corner of the ENTIRE area available is used when the placement of the context menu is decided, rather than the bottom right corner of the individual screen. All tests with various resolutions, orientations and placements of the screens are consistent with that. Let me add that this happens both with and without the Xinerama option turned on. I hope this information can help tracking the issue down. Kind regards, Daniel