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 323792 - Screenshot won't capture if pannel menus are unfolded
Screenshot won't capture if pannel menus are unfolded
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 100903
Product: gnome-utils
Classification: Deprecated
Component: screenshot
2.12.x
Other All
: High critical
: ---
Assigned To: Jonathan Blandford
gnome-utils Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2005-12-11 13:46 UTC by Quim Gil
Modified: 2006-01-28 22:56 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.11/2.12


Description Quim Gil 2005-12-11 13:46:53 UTC 
Please describe the problem:
If you want to take a screenshot of the Applications menus, System menu and so
on, you need to take the capture with these menus unfolded (obviously) but
Screenshot win0t do it when pressing the combinatio of keys (of course you can't
do this with the mouse.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Click on the applications menu to unfold it
2. Press "Print" or your combination of keys to take a screenshot

Nothing happens.

3. Close the menu.
4. Take a screenshot using the very same key.

A screenshot is shot.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Does this happen every time?
Yes

Other information:
Tested on GNOME 2.10 and 2.12 on Ubuntu
Comment 1 Quim Gil 2005-12-16 10:06:39 UTC 
If a context menu is open screenshot won't work either.

The funny/sad thing is that I'm trying to get these screenshots precisely for a
GNOME guide for newbies, so it is difficult to show them on paper wat option do
they find when opening the "Applications" menu, how context menus work...
Comment 2 Olav Vitters 2006-01-28 22:56:03 UTC 
Thanks for the bug report. This particular bug has already been reported into our bug tracking system, but please feel free to report any further bugs you find.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 100903 ***