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 688373 - terminal resizes erroneously when not switching to first tab
terminal resizes erroneously when not switching to first tab
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 685507
Product: gnome-terminal
Classification: Core
Component: general
3.6.x
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: GNOME Terminal Maintainers
GNOME Terminal Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2012-11-15 08:48 UTC by Johannes Berg
Modified: 2012-11-15 12:32 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Johannes Berg 2012-11-15 08:48:37 UTC
Note: This is possibly a duplicate of bug #611664, but the situation is a bit different and that bug report was confusing to me (and seemingly overloaded with a feature request) so I decided to file a separate bug. Also, I've never encountered this bug before upgrading to 3.6, while the other bug is ancient.



Here's how to reproduce the issue:

 1) open two terminal windows, leave them at their default size
 2) in one of them, open a new tab, stay in that tab
 3) resize this window, e.g. by making it larger (but smaller is broken too)
 4) with the mouse or alt-tab, focus the *other* window

Now what happens is that the first window resizes back to its original size from before step 3.

To work around it, insert step 3a:

 3a) select the first tab in that window ("the other" if there are only two)

Note that if you happen to have more than two, only selecting the first will be a suitable workaround.

Oh also instead of the second terminal window, any other application works as well.


I didn't have this bug with 3.4.1.1 and there are hardly any source changes between 3.4.1.1 and 3.6.1 in gnome-terminal, so maybe some window size hint handling changed in gnome-shell? Not sure where to assign this bug to instead.
Comment 1 Christian Persch 2012-11-15 11:54:48 UTC
Looks like bug 685507.
Comment 2 Johannes Berg 2012-11-15 12:32:19 UTC
yes, indeed, that looks the same

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 685507 ***