> I've always thought that a "StaysOnBottom" style would be useful
> (the evil opposite of "StaysOnTop"). I usually don't have very
> many permanent fixtures on my desktop--I like having all the real
> estate I can get. But I do have a clock and a cpu/disk/load
> monitor in addition to the FvwmPager that always reside on my
> screen. None of them are important enough to me to warrant those
> windows obstructing others, so I would like them to always be on
> the bottom of the pile. Useful? Not? Indifferent? As always,
> thanks in advance...
Windows naturally tend to drift to the bottom unless something raises
them. I assume that the clock and loadmeter are started automatically
when you log in, so all new windows should appear on top of them. If
you have mouse focus and autoraise then they will of course get
raised, but then you can just make those specific windows
click-to-focus, then they should stay on the bottom. The only
difference between this and a StaysOnBottom style is that the window
will be on the top when it is created, and when you click on it. The
latter is normally a Good Thing - otherwise don't click. :-)
I guess there may be windows that you want to be able to click on
without raising them, but they must be rare (xbiff is the only example
I can think of). Should such windows be taken care of by a
StaysOnBottom style option, by a NeverFocus style option, or not at
all ? I don't know.
> Rob Whapham
> Software Developer
> HubLink, Inc.
Jakob
--
Jakob Schiotz ! Email: schiotz_at_fysik.dtu.dk
CAMP, Department of Physics ! WWW: http://www.fysik.dtu.dk/~schiotz/
Technical University of Denmark !
DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark !
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to majordomo_at_hpc.uh.edu.
To report problems, send mail to fvwm-owner_at_hpc.uh.edu.
Received on Tue Oct 29 1996 - 10:15:41 GMT