<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugzilla.gnome.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [Wayland] Crash under gdk_wayland_window_attach_image()"
href="https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=773274#c21">Comment # 21</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [Wayland] Crash under gdk_wayland_window_attach_image()"
href="https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=773274">bug 773274</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a href="page.cgi?id=describeuser.html&login=rstrode%40redhat.com" title="Ray Strode [halfline] <rstrode@redhat.com>"> <span class="fn">Ray Strode [halfline]</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>Hi,
<span class="quote">> The reproducer is the one attached in <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [Wayland] crash at gdk_flush() called from "draw" signal handler during resize"
href="show_bug.cgi?id=773307">bug 773307</a>.</span >
Oh right, stransky explains the problem there nicely, too.
<span class="quote">> Possibly but I'm not sure it's necessary for this particular bug, is it?
> (but I have no problem amending the patch if needed. or even add a separate
> patch for that)</span >
Nope, that was just a side point i noticed when i was sniffing around the code
with the mindset of "end_paint might get bypassed now after your patch"
<span class="quote">> In theory, I agree, but it's how it's done elsewhere in
> gdk_wayland_window_ensure_cairo_surface():</span >
okay fair enough.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>