Re: Lost panel
- From: Tom Gilbert <gilbertt tomgilbert freeserve co uk>
- To: gnome-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Lost panel
- Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 11:23:54 +0000
* Peter Wainwright (prw@wainpr.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 22:34:32 Tobias Klaus wrote:
> > I had the same problem. Press /panel/ at the cammand prompt, and you'll
> > get a new one, which is the original one without your changes. There may
> > be a message that there is one already running (I don't remember
> > exactly) - press "yes". The real problem about it is, that your nice
> > customisation is gone :-(
> > Still, it would be nice, if (a) there would be a better way to deal with
> > the problem, or even better (b) not to have this problem. ;-)
>
> This is one of the really irritating things with Gnome, and it really
> has to be sorted before Gnome is ready for generaly use by the unsophisticated
> user.
>
> What happens is that when the panel starts up it sets the GNOME_PANEL X
> property on the display where it is running. If another panel starts up
> on the same display, it checks for this property, and if it finds it it
> gives you the usual warning message and refuses to save customizations
> (because it assumes that there is another panel using the config files).
>
> Unfortunately, if a panel dies unexpectedly, the GNOME_PANEL property
> is not removed; the session manager attempts to respawn a panel, but
> it acts as if there were a panel still present. This needs a redesign,
> along one of the following lines:
> (1) the panel should NEVER crash :-)
> or (2) there must be some better way than the GNOME_PANEL property to
> ensure only one panel per display.
>
Agreed. This is a pretty fishy way of doing things.
Can't the new panel check to see if something called panel is on the
process list if it finds the GNOME_PANEL property?
ie New panel finds GNOME_PANEL, but no running 'panel' process, and
so it starts up anyway.
Or, if gnome-segv finds that something called 'panel' just dumped
core, it could remove the GNOME_PANEL property itself? The gnome-segv
ustility would be much more useful IMO if it could actually clean up
after dead apps.
[Still getting the hang of Linux programming, so there may be a better
way.]
Tom.
--
.-------------------------------------------------------.
.^. | Tom Gilbert, England | tom@tomgilbert.freeserve.co.uk |
/V\ |----------------------| www.tomgilbert.freeserve.co.uk |
// \\ | Sites I recommend: `--------------------------------|
/( )\ | www.freshmeat.net www.enlightenment.org www.gnome.org |
^^-^^ `-------------------------------------------------------'
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]