RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 843119 - Change algorithm of --fullscreen window placement to avoid client primary monitor if possible
Summary: Change algorithm of --fullscreen window placement to avoid client primary mon...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: spice-gtk
Version: 6.3
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
medium
Target Milestone: beta
: 6.4
Assignee: Christophe Fergeau
QA Contact: Desktop QE
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2012-07-25 16:12 UTC by David Jaša
Modified: 2012-09-04 21:58 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-09-04 21:58:43 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description David Jaša 2012-07-25 16:12:46 UTC 
Description of problem:
currently, when 'remote-viewer --full-screen=auto-conf URI' is called to connect to a single-monitor guest on two-monitor client, it places the newly created on the client primary monitor. This is quite WTF situation because all usual client desktop controls are obscured by the guest window. It's even more absurd in case of secondary monitor being larger than primary.

Because of ^, I propose an algorithm change that if client_monitor_count > guest_monitor_count, client windows shouldn't be placed on client primary monitor

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
spice-gtk-0.11-11.el6.x86_64
virt-viewer-0.5.2-9.el6.x86_64

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. connect to a guest with smaller screen count with --full-screen option
2.
3.
  
Actual results:
guest primary monitor is placed on top of client primary monitor

Expected results:
windows with guest monitors are places in a manner so that client primary monitor remains unoccupied.

Additional info:
Comment 1 Christophe Fergeau 2012-08-03 14:31:59 UTC 
This is not necessarily what is wanted when you have a big external primary screen and a small laptop secondary screen. I don't know if it's possible to know which screen the 'remote-viewer' command was run from, we could maximize there.
Comment 2 David Jaša 2012-08-03 15:03:22 UTC 
(In reply to comment #1)
> This is not necessarily what is wanted when you have a big external primary
> screen and a small laptop secondary screen. I don't know if it's possible to
> know which screen the 'remote-viewer' command was run from, we could
> maximize there.

This would be possible if remote-viewer launched windowed and then went fullscreent - the same path as with runtime fullscreen.

Anyway, things are easy with two-monitor client and single-monitor guest. It starts getting complicated (and annoying) when screen count grows.
Comment 3 Christophe Fergeau 2012-08-03 15:15:21 UTC 
Would you be fine with that? (fullscreen on the screen the command was run from) Or would you still wish for something more sophisticated?
Comment 4 David Jaša 2012-08-29 16:36:17 UTC 
> Would you be fine with that? (fullscreen on the screen the command was run from)

I'd prefer to have something more sophisticated to keep desktop controls on primary screen visible if possible (guest_displays < client_displays).
Comment 5 Christophe Fergeau 2012-08-29 16:45:54 UTC 
Then we'll get bugs because we are not using the better higher res screen but we insist on using the lower res screen instead. Probably better to go with something dumb but predictible.
Comment 6 Marc-Andre Lureau 2012-09-04 21:58:43 UTC 
I also think auto-conf should be as simple as possible and predictable. If you want to manually place screens, just don't use auto-conf, but move and maximize windows yourself, that should work. If it doesn't, then there is a bug.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.