On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 05:15:15PM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 6 February 2015 at 17:06, Giulio Camuffo wrote:
> > The serial can be checked against the one passed to wl_shell.set_popup
> > or equivalent.
>
> Looks good to me. I was worried about the impact on other users, but
> it t
2015-02-06 22:27 GMT+02:00 Bill Spitzak :
> Why did you move the code out of the first if statement and into a duplicate
> if statement? If this needs to be done later, could the whole if/else
> statement be moved down (ie move those idle_inhibit/release calls down to
> the same point).
Because th
Why did you move the code out of the first if statement and into a
duplicate if statement? If this needs to be done later, could the whole
if/else statement be moved down (ie move those idle_inhibit/release
calls down to the same point).
On 02/06/2015 09:06 AM, Giulio Camuffo wrote:
The seria
Hi,
On 6 February 2015 at 17:06, Giulio Camuffo wrote:
> The serial can be checked against the one passed to wl_shell.set_popup
> or equivalent.
Looks good to me. I was worried about the impact on other users, but
it turns out there are no (in-tree) users of any of keyboard->grab_*.
Hah.
Bryce
The serial can be checked against the one passed to wl_shell.set_popup
or equivalent.
---
src/input.c | 9 +++--
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/input.c b/src/input.c
index fa4fc4e..a0a817f 100644
--- a/src/input.c
+++ b/src/input.c
@@ -1321,8 +1321,6 @@ notif
