sillysloft
commented
20 years ago Logged In: YES user_id=603593
use autogrouping from the apps file It doesn't yet match on the WM_WINDOW_ROLE that you mention (which is why I'm not closing this bug - should be very easy to add though), but it can do regular expressions, spaces, and matching on the class name, instance or title. You can also limit the number of instances that will match.
[group] [app] (Eterm) [end]
will group all Eterms.
You can replace (Eterm) with things like: (.*gimp.*) - anything with "gimp" in it (title=.*gimp.*) - anything with "gimp" in the title of the window (on window open) (gimp-2.0) (title=.*foo bar.*) - anything with class of "gimp-2.0", AND a title containing "foo bar".
HTH
Original comment by: rathnor
As it is, auto-grouping is a very nice feature, yet somehow, incomplete. 1. It only works for windows who's WM_CLASS is a SINGLE word with NO spaces in it. It really would help if it were expanded to let any kind of string be auto-groupable. 2. WM_CLASS is not enough anymore to auto-group windows. I complained about this to the Gimp-2.0 bug-tracker when I realized EVERY Gimp windows was caleld "gimp-2.0" (auto-grouping became automatically useless). After much complaining and asking to please give different WM_CLASS names to each window, the reply was that that's NOT the way to use WM_CLASS. WM_CLASS should be used to state to which program the windows belong to (so all windows of the same program should use the same WM_CLASS), the required "keyword" to identify each individual window is WM_WINDOW_ROLE. My request is to expand the auto-grouping facility to implement both WM_CLASS and WM_WINDOW_ROLE for selecting auto-grouping windows. Perhaps it could work with wildcards for ease of use: gimp-2.0:* would group together all windows with WM_CLASS "gimp-2.0". *:gimp-dock would group together all windows with WM_WINDOW_ROLE "gimp-dock". In the particular case of gimp-2.0, the main windows names would be: "gimp-2.0":"gimp-toolbox" "gimp-2.0":"gimp-dock" "gimp-2.0":"gimp-image-window" Please please consider using some scheme such as this for auto-grouping! I know it won't get into Fluxbox by 1.0, but at least as a future issue.... auto-grouping is a good idea, but still lacks these features....
Reported by: *anonymous