It returns FALSE when button_count is not 0. But grabbing for
move/resize is activated by clicking the button, so this condition
disallows the wayland clients to be moved/resized.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=731237
There is no way this value will ever be read, because we set the
cursor_surface to NULL, this is set at the same time as cursor_surface,
and it's only read if cursor_surface is non-NULL.
Smooth scroll event vectors from clutter have the same dimensions as the
ones from from Xi2, i.e. where 1.0 is 1 discrete scroll step. To scale
these to the coordinate space used by wl_pointer.axis
vertical/horizontal scroll events, multiply the vector by 10.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=729601
The default focus interface uses the button count to determine
whether we should update the pointer focused surface. When releasing
an implicit grab, we need to send the button release events to the
implicitly grabbed surface, so we can't reset the focus surface too
soon. We already explicitly set the focus at the end of implicit
grabs, so counting the buttons after is perfectly fine.
Scale surfaces based on output scale and the buffer scale set by them.
We pick the scale factor of the monitor there are mostly on.
We only handle native i.e non xwayland / legacy clients yet.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=728902
Advertise the scale factor on the output and transform pointer and damage
events as well as input and opaque regions for clients
that scale up by themselves i.e use set_buffer_scale.
We do not scale any 'legacy' apps yet.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=728902
Looking at the code paths where is_mouse / is_keyboard are used,
all of them should never be run when dealing with a COMPOSITOR
grab op, since they're filtered out above or the method is just
never run during that time.
It's confusing that COMPOSITOR is in here, and requires us to
be funny with other places in code, so just take it out.
pointer->current needs to always be the surface under the pointer,
even when we have a grab. We do need to make sure we keep the focus
surface the same even when we have a grab, though, so add logic
for that.
In order to correctly fix the issue to make sure we only set the
focused surface to NULL during a grab, but not the current surface,
we need to merge update_current_surface back into repick_for_event
so we have more control over the behavior here.
... not when we do an update.
We only repick when we handle events, not when we update. Perhaps
this is a mistake.
Since update runs before handle_event, this means that when we
drop a grab, update will notice the NULL surface, since we haven't
repicked after the event, and then we'll repick the correct surface.
The end result is that you see a root cursor after a grab ends,
rather than the correct window cursor.
This doesn't fix it, since the current surface becomes NULL when
we start the grab. But it does make the code here more correct when
we fix that bug.
Sophisticated clients, like those using ClutterGtk, will have more
than one focused resource per client, as both Clutter and GDK will
ask for a wl_pointer / wl_keyboard. Support this naturally using
the same "hack" as Weston: multiple resource lists, where we move
elements from one to the other.
In order to support multiple pointers for the same client, we're
going to need to kill it.
This will cause crashes for now, but will be fixed by the next
commit.
default_grab_focus tries to add implicit grab semantics where
focus won't take effect if there's a pointer button down. This
is not what we want for popup grabs at all, as it's perfectly
valid to want to drag on a menu while there's a button down.
meta_wayland_seat_repick() can be called in various cases while mutter
has a GRAB_OP ongoing which means we could be sending wrong pointer
enter/leave events.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=726123
Which is used for Wayland popup grabs.
The issue here is that we don't want the code that raises or focuses
windows based on mouse ops to run while a client has a grab.
We still keep the "old" grab infrastructure in place for now, but
ideally we'd replace it eventually with a better grab-op infrastructure.
This is not needed since the instance is being destroyed and in fact
actively harmful when code called from other handlers disconnects us
for other reasons. In that case we might crash because the
disconnection doesn't prevent other handlers from running in the
current signal emission and thus we try to remove ourselves from an
empty list.
If the client destroys the pointer resource, we shouldn't unfocus the
surface, and we should regrab it when the client gets the pointer
resource again.
This also fixes a crash at surface destruction because of the unchecked
wl_link_remove that will happen on both pointer and surface destroy.
