Bug 1375635

Summary:	nautilus not running on secondary display
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7	Reporter:	Tomas Pelka <tpelka>
Component:	nautilus	Assignee:	Carlos Soriano <csoriano>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Desktop QE <desktop-qa-list>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	7.3	CC:	J.H.Hodrien, jkoten, vbenes, vhumpa
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2016-09-14 09:26:52 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	1207646

Description Tomas Pelka 2016-09-13 14:54:32 UTC

Description of problem:
Seems nautilus is not running on secondary display, meaning I can't move icons and also context menu is different on secondary monitor compared to primary one.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
gnome-shell-3.14.4-52.el7.x86_64
nautilus-3.14.3-12.el7.x86_64


How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. try to move icon to secondary display or get a context menu on secondary display
2.
3.

Actual results:
can't move icon - it moved back to original place immediately

contex menu (right-click) on desktop is different compared to primary monitor 

Expected results:
nautilus should run on all monitors I guess

Additional info:
F24 works as expected

Comment 1 Carlos Soriano 2016-09-13 16:00:01 UTC

This was a change on pourpose. Although the situation is not ideal, you can see more info in here https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207646#c48.

This is basically the behaviour we had in Nautilus v2.

Comment 2 Tomas Pelka 2016-09-13 16:52:19 UTC

If so lets close this one and ask for release note so customer is aware.

Comment 3 Carlos Soriano 2016-09-13 17:49:59 UTC

As said in comment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207646#c48 I'm open on reverting that if necessary. But I kinda agreed it was a worse situation before.

Is something needed from my part for the release note?

Comment 4 Tomas Pelka 2016-09-13 18:45:08 UTC

(In reply to Carlos Soriano from comment #3)
> As said in comment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207646#c48
> I'm open on reverting that if necessary. But I kinda agreed it was a worse
> situation before.
> 
> Is something needed from my part for the release note?

I'd set Doc Type to release not on  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207646, you might want to see Doc Text above and update it according real situation.

Thanks
-Tom

Comment 5 Carlos Soriano 2016-09-14 09:19:47 UTC

Ok I'ill wait until you have it done and review by then. Thanks

Comment 6 Carlos Soriano 2016-09-14 09:26:52 UTC


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1207646 ***

Comment 7 John Hodrien 2016-11-24 12:31:33 UTC

Duplicate of an internal bug so I can't see any of that info.  Can you point to any upstream info on this one?  I'd like to avoid this change in behaviour if at all possible.  I couldn't see anything in the 7.3 release notes that related to this, but maybe I missed it.

jh

Comment 8 Carlos Soriano 2016-11-29 09:01:43 UTC

(In reply to John Hodrien from comment #7)
> Duplicate of an internal bug so I can't see any of that info.  Can you point
> to any upstream info on this one?  I'd like to avoid this change in
> behaviour if at all possible.  I couldn't see anything in the 7.3 release
> notes that related to this, but maybe I missed it.
> 
> jh

Hello,

Please contact RHEL support.

Best regards