After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 314911 - Free Select Lasso could use a better line to show selection
Free Select Lasso could use a better line to show selection
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 306396
Product: GIMP
Classification: Other
Component: Tools
2.2.x
Other All
: Normal enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: GIMP Bugs
GIMP Bugs
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2005-08-31 02:45 UTC by Derek
Modified: 2008-01-15 12:59 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---

Attachments
The Free Select Tool on XP (41.45 KB, image/jpeg)
2005-09-02 21:03 UTC, Derek 		Details

Description Derek 2005-08-31 02:45:20 UTC 
I think the free select lasso could use a better line to show where it has
selected pixels. It is inconsistent. Usually it looks dotten and sometimes looks
like it's width doubles when going in diagonal directions. A solid line like the
ellipse select would be better.
Comment 1 weskaggs 2005-08-31 17:46:55 UTC 
Interesting.  This reminds me of bug 306396, but I think that should have been
fixed if you are using the latest version of Gtk+.  Are you?
Comment 2 Derek 2005-09-02 21:03:20 UTC 
Created attachment 51744 [details]
The Free Select Tool on XP

Selection tool screenshot
WinXP
Comment 3 Derek 2005-09-02 21:04:32 UTC 
I always update to the latest GTK+ version regardless of whether or not I need
to. Since I have been using the GIMP (since 2.0) the line that it leaves when
you are drawing the selection borders is inconsistent in width, and looks kind
of like a pen running out of ink. I attach a screen shot above. Thanks.
Comment 4 Michael Schumacher 2006-01-09 01:57:08 UTC 
I can't reproduce this - using GTK+ 2.6.10 and GIMP 2.2.10+, the line is exactly one px wide.
Comment 5 Michael Schumacher 2006-02-15 18:58:01 UTC 
Let's assume that it is a duplicate then.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 306396 ***