1 |
On 2015-09-18, J. Roeleveld <joost@××××××××.org> wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
>>> echo $DISPLAY returns the same on both desktops. |
4 |
>> |
5 |
>> That is a single X11 screen spread across two physical monitors. It |
6 |
>> will not exhibit the gtk-3 selection bug. |
7 |
>> |
8 |
>> Are you sure you have two desktops and it's not just a single desktop |
9 |
>> that is spread across two monitors? Can you drag a window from one |
10 |
>> monitor to the other? If you can, then it's a single desktop. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> Yes, I can. |
13 |
> When I maximize a window, it's only on 1 screen. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> This is how it seems "right" to me. |
16 |
|
17 |
Then by all means continue to use it that way. That's how most people |
18 |
seem to like it. |
19 |
|
20 |
> Why would I want it to be different? Eg. windows can't be moved |
21 |
> between screens? I don't see the point of having more than 1 screen |
22 |
> in that case. |
23 |
|
24 |
I like having separate screens because the window manager I use |
25 |
(xfwm4) supports multiple virtual workspaces for each screen (4 per |
26 |
screen by default). I find it very useful to be able to flip one |
27 |
screen to a different workspace while leaving the others unaffected. |
28 |
That allows me, for example, to leave email and web-browser up on one |
29 |
screen while switching the other two back and forth between multiple |
30 |
tasks/projects. (I am rarely allowed to work uninterrupted for long |
31 |
periods on a single task.) |
32 |
|
33 |
Not being able to move windows between screens is an inconvenience, |
34 |
but for me it's well worth it to get independently switchable virtual |
35 |
workspaces on each screen. |
36 |
|
37 |
-- |
38 |
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Pardon me, but do you |
39 |
at know what it means to be |
40 |
gmail.com TRULY ONE with your BOOTH! |