Patched panel-profile.c to have multiple Xscreens work.

[axelolmos]

For newer versions of the panel, if you have multiple X screens, that is to say:
DISPLAY=:0.0 DISPLAY=:0.1 the panel will create two menus on screen 0, and none on screen 1.

The desired behavior is one menu per X screen. This gets very important if you are running multiple video cards and multiple monitors.

When running only one X screen this patch shouldn't matter.

The stacking of menus and icons on the first screen has been happening since the gnome-panel >2.1 days. It happens on anything that forked off of newer versions of Gnome 2.

This patch, although crudely written, restores the desired behavior.
Please modify it to your content and apply it to all versions of the panel.

Thank You.

[thenewguy]

Any chance of this being fixed?

[raveit65]

@monsta
Can you please review this long outstanding PR ?

[monsta]

In #149 the menubar is mentioned only as example:

However, any interaction with the widgets on the second screen shows up on the first screen rather than the second.

So what if the widget is a clock, for example? Or a volume control applet?
I look at the code here and don't see anything for that.

[axelolmos]

I created this web page to illustrate the issue:
http://www.olmosconsulting.com/mate-panel

There's documentation there as to the nature of the problem, and how I solved it.

The easiest way to get a handle on this is have two monitors on your PC, and set up your xorg.conf so that you have two screens. I have a sample xorg.conf where I do 16 screens at: http://www.olmosconsulting.com/mate-panel/xorg.conf

The code I submitted is a hack. I simply made a guess as to what was going on, and tried to fix it. When it worked the way I expected, I stopped writing.

That being said, the ability to use multiple video cards and multiple monitors with separate screens has been a feature of Unix / Linux operating systems running X / Xorg for decades. It shouldn't die because of bug in an application higher up on the stack.

[monsta]

The code I submitted is a hack.

That's why we can't accept it as is. We need some more generic solution.

/* We make the possibly wrong assumption that each screen only has one menu bar
   This is how we know to increment the screen number.  */

What if there's no classic menubar at all?