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 316566 - Toggling Totem Side Panel Causes Totem Window to resize randomly and dramatically
Toggling Totem Side Panel Causes Totem Window to resize randomly and dramatic...
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 313212
Product: totem
Classification: Core
Component: general
1.2.x
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: General Totem maintainer(s)
General Totem maintainer(s)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2005-09-17 12:32 UTC by Sebastien Bacher
Modified: 2005-09-17 22:52 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.11/2.12


Description Sebastien Bacher 2005-09-17 12:32:04 UTC 
This bug has been opened here: http://bugzilla.ubuntu.com/show_bug.cgi?id=14756

"This bug has been present and reproduced since version 1.1.3 of totem all the
way to the latest 1.2.0.

Pressing and toggling the "Side Panel" button OR shortcut key (F9) repeatedly
causes the totem main window to change size drastically in the horizontal
direction. This is very unpleasant to the eye and the behavior is not expected.

Expected behavior: The panel should either be added as an "extra" space to the
right side of the already existing totem window, OR it should take up an area of
the already existing totem window. The current implementation however can't make
up it's mind and either does the former, or the latter, and sometimes a little
bit of both!

I would recommend rating this higher on the cosmetic bugs because the panel is
advertised as one the new totems main features and it's not working correctly
visually."
Comment 1 Sergej Kotliar 2005-09-17 22:52:08 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 313212 ***