On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 13:44:59 +0200 Alfredo Fernández Díaz wrote:
>
>On 20/09/27 04:15, Gregg Young wrote:
>>On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 01:04:42 +0200 Alfredo Fern ndez D¡az wrote:
>>>
>>>On 20/09/26 23:01, Gregg Young wrote:
>>>Of course, I see. But if the code in XCenter did the same, I mean, if
>>>"reduce Desktop" is checked, check if something is using it already on
>>>startup, and act accordingly, wouldn't it all appear to work OK? At
>>>least no application would cause the other to fail, and it's not like
>>>there are many more to interfere out there. Am I missing something
>>>else?
>>
>>You have a plan for forcing the update of XWP on all systems and
>>preventing
>>the use of Warp Center which we can't fix and you know for certain
>>these
>>are the only programs that use this?
>
>I always have a plan. Phase I is getting to know how all of this works
>without looking at the code. Thanks for your help ;)
Hi Alfred
The real solution would be modifying WinSetDesktopWorkArea in PMMERGE to check to see if the desktop was already reduced and return an error on any subsequent call except one to restore the desktop to its original size. Of course this isn't going to happen.
We need to remember this is an undocumented call and IBM never intended for others to use it. As such it was not designed for that possibility. Just like it wasn't designed to be called with a less than full width window over the reduced area. For completeness of your planning I can probably hide the stupid desktop titlebar.
>I imagine the lack of a WarpCenter object in ArcaOS kind of prevents
>its use. If the people at ArcaNoae were really determined to do that
>I imagine they could also prevent the SmartCenter class from being
>registered in the first place in future versions. That would be an even
>safer way to be sure nothing will interfere with what's not even there.
>And I imagine those people would want as many customers as possible to
>be reasonably updated. Seriously, how many people are left outside that
>lot (besides me ;)?
Probably a lot; OS/2 users aren't exactly a progressive bunch. I know one that is still using a prehistoric version of lSwitcher;-)
>
>Then it's all a matter of documenting things properly (do not do this
>and that for such and such reason: just a twist on the current docs) and
>wait for reports of the three people in the entire universe who still
>see something break up in their systems.
Fortunately they never bother to report anything. Think my breaking of all the non-English languages in 2.91 and never hearing anything about it.
>
>But you know, I've been planning to upgrade my lSwitcher for some time
>now, so don't get upset. I would say you still have years to see my
>plans change. :-)
>
>....
>>>Almost there, see attachment. Could you move it further left to align
>>>with 'Idioma' above, maybe? I think we'd be done for good.
>>
>>On my system if I do that I see a strange clipped box following the +
>>sign.
>>I can move 'Idioma' to the right if you like. Thanks
>
>I'll have a look at that later. I've changed a couple of strings to stay
>closer to the current English menu (lSwitcher settings -> Properties,
>and help mnemonics).
Am I to read this that I need to change the hotkeys again. Remember the mnemonics and hotkeys must match.
>
>[...]
>>>-Open a WPS folder window. Bring up the PM popup, 'C' is for close,
>>>and works; good. Open the folder again, bring up the popup menu for
>>>the folder on the taskbar ('Move' is in there, btw): now 'Close' is a
>>>submenu with 'Close' and 'Quit', and 'Quit' does nothing, as I half
>>>expected. I suppose that's meant for applications (which have 'Close',
>>>'Quit', 'SigKill', 'DosKill'...)
>>
>>I am not clear as to what you are telling me here.
>
>Yeah, I've written better pieces. Have a look at the screenshot.
>'Programs' is a WPS folder: you can make it 'Close' but not 'Quit'.
>Maybe the 'Close' menu should be replaced by its first child item, which
>is the only one that works in that situation.
I think Quit just needs to be removed it has no advantage over close and mostly doesn't work.
>
>>>
>>>-Packaging: any particular reason why we keep old English readmes,
>>>i.e.
>>>readme.v*?
>>
>>I always package the historic readmes on my first release. They can
>>probably go away now. Thanks
>
>Thank you for all you do ^^
Your welcome. Thanks for your help and translations.
back to list