On Tue, 7 Apr 2015 12:12:13 -0500 Derek Foreman <[email protected]> wrote:
> The first break in TYPE_WM_PROTOCOLS was almost certainly intended to be > nested within the if statement. > > Even if it wasn't, it makes sense there. > > Signed-off-by: Derek Foreman <[email protected]> > --- > xwayland/window-manager.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xwayland/window-manager.c b/xwayland/window-manager.c > index 7018c92..83ebfae 100644 > --- a/xwayland/window-manager.c > +++ b/xwayland/window-manager.c > @@ -459,10 +459,10 @@ weston_wm_window_read_properties(struct > weston_wm_window *window) > case TYPE_WM_PROTOCOLS: > atom = xcb_get_property_value(reply); > for (i = 0; i < reply->value_len; i++) > - if (atom[i] == wm->atom.wm_delete_window) > + if (atom[i] == wm->atom.wm_delete_window) { > window->delete_window = 1; > - break; > - > + break; > + } > break; > case TYPE_WM_NORMAL_HINTS: > memcpy(&window->size_hints, R-b me and pushed. 8cb2587..b4deec6 master -> master Thanks, pq _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
