Easily reproduced following steps in that email.
I'm pretty sure this was working with Xserver 1.6.x, and reporter agrees, but
it's not immediately obvious what's changed to break it.
http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin-xfree/2010-01/msg00114.html looks like the same
issue, so possibly occurs with other remote host OS as well.
(nothing happening with numlock is
and this http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin-xfree/2010-01/msg00048.html
and again... http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2010-02/msg00523.html
After rather too long spent debugging and discovering this is due to the input
device getting frozen but not thawed when a passive grab triggers, it occured to
me to check if this problem is also shown in the XOrg DDX.
Reproduced with FC12 Xserver 1.7.1-7. Updating to Xserver 1.7.4-6, the problem
confirming that the patch in fd.o bug #25400 fixes this.
Thanks for tracking this down. Patch from fd.o 25400 pulled and cherry-picked
into 1.7 branch. Closing.
Reopening, this patch only seems to have resovled some of the problems
Follwing the steps in Marks' email, the reproduction I have is:
X -query solaris10vm
start CDE session
click on one of the "^" on the panel to launch something
note that you can interact with that application, reize etc.
go back to click on the panel
input is now frozen
Reproduced with Xwin 1.7.5-1, XWin 1.7.5-1 with the latest patch for fd.o
bugzilla #25400 applied , and FC12 xorg-x11-xserver-Xorg-1.7.5-1
and again http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2010-03/msg00022.html
Solaris 2.5.1, Initial Release: May 1996, woohoo!
and again http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2010-08/msg00000.html
There have been some relevant changes in X server 1.9, and from some brief
testing with the 188.8.131.525 (1.9 RC 5), it looks like this is resolved in 1.9
(In reply to comment #13)
> There have been some relevant changes in X server 1.9, and from some brief
> testing with the 184.108.40.2065 (1.9 RC 5), it looks like this is resolved in 1.9
Has this been confirmed?
(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #13)
> > There have been some relevant changes in X server 1.9, and from some brief
> > testing with the 220.127.116.115 (1.9 RC 5), it looks like this is resolved in 1.9
> Has this been confirmed?
The reproduction steps in comment #9 no longer reproduce the problem with Xserver 1.9.0-1, so I guess this is confirmed as fixed :-)