We only update the last device from actual input interaction here,
avoid this pair of events. This is specially nasty with
CLUTTER_DEVICE_REMOVED, since the device we're notifying upon will be
disposed soon after emission.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/merge_requests/1460
The delete event was used for signalling the close button was clicked on
clutter windows. Being a compositor we should never see these, unless
we're running nested. Remove the plumbing of the DELETE event and just
directly call meta_quit() when we see it, if we're running nested.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/merge_requests/1364
We used to inhibit all pad actions while the OSD is shown, but one we
would actually want to handle are mode switches while the OSD is open.
So it has an opportunity to catch up to the mode switch.
This lets MetaInputSettings reflect the mode switch (eg. when querying
action labels), so the OSD has an opportunity to update the current
actions.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/merge_requests/975
Mutter issues a synchronous grab on the pointer for unfocused client
windows to be able to catch the button events first and raise/focus
client windows accordingly.
When there is a synchronous grab in effect, all events are queued until
the grabbing client releases the event queue as it processes the events.
Mutter does release the events in its event handler function but does so
only if it is able to find the window matching the event. If the window
is a shell widget, that matching may fail and therefore Mutter will not
release the events, hence causing a freeze in pointer events delivery.
To avoid the issue, make sure we sync the pointer events in case we
can't find a matching window.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/merge_requests/821
When double clicking to un-maximize an X11 window under Wayland, there
is a race between X11 and Wayland protocols and the X11 XConfigureWindow
may be processed by Xwayland before the button press event is forwarded
via the Wayland protocol.
As a result, the second click may reach another X11 window placed right
underneath in the X11 stack.
Make sure we do not forward the button press event to Wayland if it was
handled by the frame UI.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/issues/88
Commit 25f416c13d added additional compilation warnings, including
-Werror=return-type. There are several places where this results
in build failures if `g_assert_not_reached()` is disabled at compile
time and the compiler misses a return value.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/issues/447
The order and way include macros were structured was chaotic, with no
real common thread between files. Try to tidy up the mess with some
common scheme, to make things look less messy.
- Stop using CurrentTime, introduce META_CURRENT_TIME
- Use g_get_monotonic_time () instead of relying on an
X server running and making roundtrip to it
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=759538
And use the old "native" backend for both X11 and Wayland. This will
allow us to share fixes between implementations without having to delve
into the XSync X11 extension code.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=705942
Otherwise the ClutterEventFilter will consider these handled, and not
forward these to Clutter. This gets necessary for key handling if we
mean to implement the close dialog with Clutter UI.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=762083
Just like we do for buttons, with a few twists. These have 2 directions
mappable to different keycombos, and are affected by the current mode
in their group.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=782033
As all the relevant backends are expected to provide
ClutterPadButtonEvents, it makes no sense to split the information,
plus all other event fields are now available and might be needed
in the future.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=771098
Let the backend initialize the cursor tracker, and change all call
sites to get the cursor tracker from the backend instead of from the
screen. It wasn't associated with the screen anyway, so the API was
missleading.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=777732
And remove the wayland-specific handling. This works for both Wayland and
X11 (provided the compositor receives pad events through a passive grab
there).
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=773779
Even without a compositor grab, key events may still be expected to
be processed by the compositor and not applications, for instance
when using ctrl-alt-tab to keynav in the top bar. On X11, focus is
moved to the stage window in that case, so that events are processed
before they are dispatched by the window manager. On wayland, we need
to handle this case ourselves, so make sure to not pass key events to
wayland in that case, and move the key focus back to the stage when
appropriate.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=758167
Unsetting it in meta_display_handle_event() will make the pointer
emulation checks fail on TOUCH_END event handlers across clutter
actors, the sequence should still be considered as pointer emulating
at that time.
As we don't have a way to hook this post clutter event handling,
instead unset/reset it lazily on the next pointer emulating TOUCH_BEGIN
event, the checks would already fail on other sequences, even if the
pointer emulating touch ended earlier. The only extra thing we need
to take care about is sequence collision, at which point it's safe to
just unset the stored sequence if its new incarnation isn't flagged/
deemed as pointer emulating.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=756754
They otherwise fall through paths that enable bypass_clutter, this
is necessary so they can be picked by captured-event handlers
along the actor hierarchy.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=752248
When running as an X11 compositor we do this for every event we see on
the X event stream. As a wayland compositor we don't go through that
code path but since we see all events we can easily do this on motion
events.
In fact, we don't even need this caching when we're a wayland
compositor since we can always find where the pointer is without a
round trip but we're sharing the current monitor logic with the X
path so let's keep it as is for now.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=748478
The set/unset branches of meta_display_update_pointer_emulating_sequence()
have been split and put directly where it makes sense. The pointer emulated
sequence will be updated before processing the CLUTTER_TOUCH_BEGIN, and
after processing the CLUTTER_TOUCH_END, this way the checks on this hold
true during all the sequence lifetime.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=738411
We've long used a switch statement on the grab operation to determine
where events should go. The issue with MetaGrabOp is that it's a mixture
of a few different things, including event routing, state management,
and the behavior to choose during operations.
This leads to poorly defined event routing and hard-to-follow logic,
since it's sometimes unclear what should point where, and our utility
methods for determining grab operations apart can be poorly named.
To fix this, establish the concept of a "event route", which describes
where events should be routed to.
Instead of returning a value based on whether or not we handled it, we
have this logic: either we have taken a grab on the window, in which
case we have a grab op and have handled it ourselves, or we did not take
a grab and *need* to replay the event to the window.
Handle this in events.c by checking the grab operation in the same way
that we check the other grab ops.
MetaGestureTracker has been separating the "did I handle an event?" and the
"should the event be filtered out?" questions, merge this and make
handle_event() reply to "should the event be only handled by me?".
If a sequence wasn't accepted yet by the gesture tracker, the event will
go through (eg. not handled exclusively by the gesture tracker) and it'll
still be processed by Clutter, triggering gesture actions, and maybe
changing the sequence into other state.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=733631
This function tells the obvious on X11, and implements a similar mechanism
on wayland to determine the "pointer emulating" sequence, or one to stick
with when implementing single-touch behavior.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=733631
