<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugzilla.gnome.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Restoring maximized window state in Wayland results in tiny window"
href="https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=783901#c28">Comment # 28</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Restoring maximized window state in Wayland results in tiny window"
href="https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=783901">bug 783901</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a href="page.cgi?id=describeuser.html&login=jadahl%40gmail.com" title="Jonas Ã…dahl <jadahl@gmail.com>"> <span class="fn">Jonas Ã…dahl</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to Olivier Fourdan from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=783901#c26">comment #26</a>)
<span class="quote">> In meta_window_unmaximize(), the saved rect is restored, it can be shrunk to be
> less than 80% of the workarea though.</span >
Isn't this the way we get the unmaximize size? Or where else do we get the
"incorrect" unmaximized size?
<span class="quote">> I just fail to understand why we end up calling meta_window_show() from
> idle_calc_showing() in this particular case...</span >
IIRC the problem was that the client didn't get the
xdg_toplevel.configure(maximized, width, height) but a
xdg_toplevel.configure(normal, 0, 0) causing it to show up non-maximized, and
when we ended up showing (because well it was "ready") we
"maximized-after-placed", and it took a while for the client to provide the
actual maximized buffer.
If we can fix the original problem causing this regression messing less with
forcing placement and what not, I agree that it would probably be better.</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>