compiz - Apr 2007 - White boarders on size 32 shadows. Intel platform only

Recently, I brought up a topic about white boarders being drawn instead of
shadows in Gnome-Window-Decorator. A patch was made up by gandalfn to
correct this by making 32 pixel shadows 33 pixels, however the patch was not
committed because it was a workaround.

This is a huge functional annoyance to us intel users and needs to be cured.
There are two soultions I can think of:

1 Get in contact with the X.org i810 team and ask them to correct the issue
in their driver which does not allow 32 pixel shadows to be drawn.
2 Allow the user to specify in GConf or something the depth of the shadows
that GWD creates. Emerald from Beryl currently allows this so I don't
understand why it would be too hard to implement.

Yes I *know* #2 is more like a workaround but at least it allows the user to
specify how big they want this shadows to be. (Please dont confuse this with
X-offset adn Y-Offset).

Also, could we please stick the topic this time and make sure that another
problem does not get fixed instead of mine.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/compiz/attachments/20070429/e17f1ff7/attachment.html

On Sun, 2007-04-29 at 17:43 +0800, Sam Spilsbury wrote:
> Recently, I brought up a topic about white boarders being drawn
> instead of shadows in Gnome-Window-Decorator. A patch was made up by
> gandalfn to correct this by making 32 pixel shadows 33 pixels, however
> the patch was not committed because it was a workaround. 
> 
> This is a huge functional annoyance to us intel users and needs to be
> cured. There are two soultions I can think of:
> 
> 1 Get in contact with the X.org i810 team and ask them to correct the
> issue in their driver which does not allow 32 pixel shadows to be
> drawn. 
> 2 Allow the user to specify in GConf or something the depth of the
> shadows that GWD creates. Emerald from Beryl currently allows this so
> I don't understand why it would be too hard to implement.
> 
> Yes I *know* #2 is more like a workaround but at least it allows the
> user to specify how big they want this shadows to be. (Please dont
> confuse this with X-offset adn Y-Offset). 
I did some quick testing and the problem indeed seem to be a driver
issue but I haven't had time to track down exactly what's causing it.
There's nothing we can do until someone have been able to track it down.
You can enter a intel 3d driver bug for this if you want and if we're
lucky someone might be able to help us track this down.

- David

On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 07:02 +0800, Sam Spilsbury wrote:
> Is it possible for the user to specify how big they want thier shadow
> to be in gconf? I know its possible in the emerald window decorator
yes, shadow_radius key.

- David

On Sun, 2007-05-06 at 13:59 +0800, Sam Spilsbury wrote:
> So, wait, does that change the shadow *size* to another value other
> than 32?
It's the radius of the gaussian function used to generate the shadow. A
small change might not change the number of pixels required for the
shadow but a large one will.
> 
> On 5/4/07, David Reveman <davidr at novell.com> wrote:
>         On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 07:02 +0800, Sam Spilsbury wrote:
>         > Is it possible for the user to specify how big they want
>         thier shadow 
>         > to be in gconf? I know its possible in the emerald window
>         decorator
>         
>         yes, shadow_radius key.
>         
>         - David
>         
>         
>         
> 
- David