On 2023-03-08 18:02:42 +0100, Yvan Masson wrote:

Using testing with KDE, I have an issue since last update: for many QT applications and some GTK applications, menus (File, Edit…) or even drop-down lists are difficult to trigger (Moste often I need to click and then press Alt). I would like to ensure this bug has already been reported (which might not has it has already entered testing), but I don't know which package to look at.

I'm using Debian/unstable with FVWM (no desktop environment), and I
don't have any issue with menus... except with those of Firefox 110,
where the menus behave very strangely with the mouse (but everything
is fine with the keyboard). Firefox 109 and the other applications
(QT and GTK) do not have any issue.

I don't see how this could be related, but having 2 similar bugs
with menus at the same time would be a strange coincidence (though
this might be a consequence of something broken on the system).

FYI, my bug reports for Firefox 110, with some details on the
behavior I get:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1820542
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1032428

--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-03-09 04:32:05 -0500, Timothy M Butterworth wrote:

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 4:06 AM Timothy Butterworth < timothy.m.butterworth@gmail.com> wrote:

Try running apt fully upgrade

`sudo apt full-upgrade` sorry about that my tablet auto-corrected.

AFAIK, "apt full-upgrade" is for stable to the next stable,
not for testing and unstable (one typically resolves conflicts
interactively).

--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-03-09 08:33:08 +0100, Yvan Masson wrote:

I might be the same issue indeed. A temporary workaround I have just found
is to run KDE on Wayland. But I suppose it is not possible with FVWM.

In any case, I sometimes need to run remote X applications
transparently, so Wayland is not an option for me.

--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 10:40:14AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:

AFAIK, "apt full-upgrade" is for stable to the next stable,
not for testing and unstable (one typically resolves conflicts interactively).

Interesting. I don't use `apt` but "full-upgrade" is what I've been
using with testing for the last 20 years, first with `apt-get` then with `aptitude`.

It's just a tad riskier -- you allow apt to change versions and
potentially remove packages. If you keep a small cross section
you won't get hit often :)

Cheers
--
t

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iF0EABECAB0WIQRp53liolZD6iXhAoIFyCz1etHaRgUCZAomUQAKCRAFyCz1etHa RoIjAJ422vENfNqCfkR4ETXsvcEobq3+HwCfZq+ymjflDJGcztnmkYWa/3J6k+M=
=+7pf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-03-09 15:34:05 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:

AFAIK, "apt full-upgrade" is for stable to the next stable,
not for testing and unstable (one typically resolves conflicts
interactively).

Interesting. I don't use `apt` but "full-upgrade" is what I've been
using with testing for the last 20 years, first with `apt-get` then with >> `aptitude`.

It's just a tad riskier -- you allow apt to change versions and
potentially remove packages. If you keep a small cross section
you won't get hit often :)

I always review the set of removed packages, indeed (tho when that set
is large, it's easy to miss something). Note that this same problem
occurs for users of `stable` when moving from one release to the
next, tho, with the caveat that in this case the set is always large (arguably too large to review).

For stable, this is generally safer: removed packages are normally
obsolete packages. For unstable or testing, the cause may be a
temporary problem, and important packages may be removed.

--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 03:34:05PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:

AFAIK, "apt full-upgrade" is for stable to the next stable,
not for testing and unstable (one typically resolves conflicts
interactively).

Interesting. I don't use `apt` but "full-upgrade" is what I've been
using with testing for the last 20 years, first with `apt-get` then with >> `aptitude`.

It's just a tad riskier -- you allow apt to change versions and
potentially remove packages. If you keep a small cross section
you won't get hit often :)

I always review the set of removed packages, indeed (tho when that set
is large, it's easy to miss something). Note that this same problem
occurs for users of `stable` when moving from one release to the
next, tho, with the caveat that in this case the set is always large (arguably
too large to review).

Yes, with stable you get the pain only once, in a big hunk, every
couple o'years, with testing it's piecemeal :-)

To be honest though, with stable some of those nits get ironed out
(in testing) before they reach you, and... you got release notes.

But yes, I've been running on testing myself in the past and doing
full-upgrade (I called it dist-upgrade back then), and things sailed
mostly smoothly.

It's just that doing upgrade on stable (full or not) is so rock
solid that we get spoiled.

Cheers
--
t

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iF0EABECAB0WIQRp53liolZD6iXhAoIFyCz1etHaRgUCZArA/wAKCRAFyCz1etHa RilnAJ4n8rrm/tHL0eIgrxYTehvFqYQTHACeNbUIfuiPcNYO0CW1DjpzbkIc2M4=
=wf8f
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-03-09 04:19:22 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:

FYI, my bug reports for Firefox 110, with some details on the
behavior I get:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1820542
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1032428

Now it appears that this bug is actually a Firefox specific bug,
which occurs with some window managers, such as FVWM and TWM.
Details on Bugzilla. So, this is unrelated to the OP's bug.

--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)