| Summary: | SDL_SYSTEM_CURSOR_WAITARROW May Not Work Properly | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | SDL | Reporter: | N. de Jonge <mail> |
| Component: | video | Assignee: | Ryan C. Gordon <icculus> |
| Status: | RESOLVED ABANDONED | QA Contact: | Sam Lantinga <slouken> |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P2 | CC: | icculus |
| Version: | 2.0.0 | ||
| Hardware: | x86 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Attachments: | WAITARROW in Xfce | ||
|
Description
N. de Jonge
2014-01-19 19:43:54 UTC
Created attachment 1526 [details]
WAITARROW in Xfce
Just to show that WAITARROW is available in (my) Xfce.
The problem is that we do this at the X11 level, so we have code that does this...
case SDL_SYSTEM_CURSOR_WAIT: shape = XC_watch; break;
case SDL_SYSTEM_CURSOR_WAITARROW: shape = XC_watch; break;
...which is why you get the same result for both.
We only go with the system cursors, built into the X server, even if the X11 window manager has more in some form, so here are the available X11 options:
http://tronche.com/gui/x/xlib/appendix/b/
I'm not familiar enough with this part of X11 to understand if accessing the Xfce cursors are something we can do (and do reasonably), though, but I suspect this is something we can't fix.
--ryan.
Hello, and sorry if you're getting dozens of copies of this message by email. We are closing out bugs that appear to be abandoned in some form. This can happen for lots of reasons: we couldn't reproduce it, conversation faded out, the bug was noted as fixed in a comment but we forgot to mark it resolved, the report is good but the fix is impractical, we fixed it a long time ago without realizing there was an associated report, etc. Individually, any of these bugs might have a better resolution (such as WONTFIX or WORKSFORME or INVALID) but we've added a new resolution of ABANDONED to make this easily searchable and make it clear that it's not necessarily unreasonable to revive a given bug report. So if this bug is still a going concern and you feel it should still be open: please feel free to reopen it! But unless you respond, we'd like to consider these bugs closed, as many of them are several years old and overwhelming our ability to prioritize recent issues. (please note that hundred of bug reports were sorted through here, so we apologize for any human error. Just reopen the bug in that case!) Thanks, --ryan. |