Re: XCB_DESTROY_NOTIFY & SIGTERM

On Wed, Dec 4 2024 at 05:32:06 PM +0000, Uli Schlachter 
<[email protected]> wrote:
> How come you only get XCB_DESTROY_NOTIFY for your window? Normally, 
> one uses the WM_DELETE_WINDOW to get a notification and destroy the 
> window oneself. That way, you can clean up your cairo resources 
> before the window is gone.

On WM_DELETE_WINDOW:
  /* check transients, appropriate branch */
 xcb_unmap_window(connection, window);
  /* user save stuff, non-transient */
 xcb_destroy_window(connection, window);
 xcb_flush(connection);
which yields a XCB_DESTROY_NOTIFY at which point:
 free/destroy data that was attached to destroy->window (event), from 
list.

But what you are implying is that cairo is wrong in that "The caller 
owns the surface and should call cairo_surface_destroy() when done with 
it.", and it's owned by xcb?
Easy enuf to move after user save, I think?. Would create 2 locations 
for resource deletion. Maybe a cairo ownership issue? Insights, on 
cairo if any?

And to both of you, thank you for explanation on how to decrypt generic 
error :)
Steve