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 121306 - OptionMenu show empty entries when filling with more entries than can be shown on the screen
OptionMenu show empty entries when filling with more entries than can be show...
Status: RESOLVED NOTABUG
Product: gtk+
Classification: Platform
Component: Widget: Other
2.2.x
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: gtk-bugs
gtk-bugs
: 126111 128165 132739 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2003-09-02 22:44 UTC by tvignaud
Modified: 2004-12-22 21:47 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---

Attachments
screenshot of an example of this bug (37.51 KB, image/png)
2003-09-02 22:45 UTC, tvignaud 		Details
test case (1.07 KB, text/plain)
2003-09-02 22:45 UTC, tvignaud 		Details

Description tvignaud 2003-09-02 22:44:11 UTC 
i know that this widget is obsolete in incoming gtk+-2.4 but its behaviour
is totally broken when one fill an OptionMenu with more items that it can
display on the screen.

once it need to scroll, the menu is displayed with top half being empty:
the bottom half show first entries and a cursor to scroll down but the top
is empty.

when one scroll down, we cannot then scroll up higher than first item of
the menu (that is the first item is at top of the menu).

this should be true on first menu opening too.

see screenshot & testcase
Comment 1 tvignaud 2003-09-02 22:45:07 UTC 
Created attachment 19683 [details]
screenshot of an example of this bug
Comment 2 tvignaud 2003-09-02 22:45:52 UTC 
Created attachment 19684 [details]
test case
Comment 3 Owen Taylor 2003-09-02 23:31:28 UTC 
That is correct behavior. The point is that the current item
needs should appear under the mouse.

See bug 72695 for discussion.
Comment 4 Sven Neumann 2003-12-16 10:47:43 UTC 
*** Bug 126111 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 Raphaël Quinet 2003-12-17 16:27:24 UTC 
*** Bug 128165 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 6 Manish Singh 2004-01-28 08:20:17 UTC 
*** Bug 132739 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***