[Pidgin] #6476: Pidgin adds --display to the wm's session information, breaking remote terminals.

[Pidgin]

#6476: Pidgin adds --display to the wm's session information, breaking remote
terminals.
----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  gdvieira  |           Owner:  deryni      
     Type:  defect    |          Status:  new         
Milestone:            |       Component:  pidgin (gtk)
  Version:  2.4.3     |      Resolution:              
 Keywords:            |   Launchpad_bug:              
----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------

Comment(by deryni):

 Pidgin used to restore correctly for people for whom the display
 information changed and used to restore incorrectly for people who had it
 on non-primary displays. A patch was submitted to fix the latter bug,
 unfortunately it broken the former working scenario. A fix that covers
 both cases is what we really need, and what I asked for the last time I
 commented on this. Someone who actually uses and understands session
 storing/restoration needs to figure out how this is supposed to work (for
 both cases) and make pidgin do that.

 Nothing has been done because (as far as I know) none of the developers
 use session restoration and thus we are not affected by this and are
 unable to test it and no one who does use it and thus is affected has come
 up with a solution which covers both cases.

 Checking that the display exists would entail checking (to the best of our
 ability) that said display is the user's active display (I have no idea if
 this is even something that can feasibly be detected, I know we can test
 if the display is usable by the user but that isn't the same thing).

 This is a nasty bug, and fixing it by breaking restoration for users (like
 the creator of the patch in #3137) who run pidgin on secondary displays is
 not a viable option (by your own logic mind you). Had we known about this
 breakage when the initial patch had been submitted we would likely not
 have applied it as-is, however we didn't and it has now been in place for
 a year and a half which (as far as I am concerned) places it squarely into
 the status-quo category.

 Do any of the other applications you mention work correctly for the
 restore-to-secondary-monitor case? The case that motivated the patch in
 #3137 in the first place? Have you tried them? If they do in fact work for
 both that case and this case then please let us know so we can check to
 see how they handle it.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/6476#comment:8>
Pidgin <http://pidgin.im>
Pidgin