[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    KAccel problems (in KMail)
From:       Ingo =?iso-8859-1?q?Kl=F6cker?= <ingo.kloecker () epost ! de>
Date:       2002-01-22 23:23:38
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

I experience the following problems with the new KAccel classes (cvs 
from about 5 hours ago) in KMail. With the old KAccel classes these 
problems didn't occur. So there is either a bug in the new classes or 
KMail hasn't been adapted correctly to the new classes.

Problem #1:
Bind 'u' to mark as unread and 'i' to mark as important via the  
Settings->Configure Shortcuts... dialog. Press OK. Now the two 
shortcuts work as expected and the shortcut appears in the menu and the 
context menu. So far so good. Now exit KMail. Looking into kmmainwin.rc 
I can see that the shortcuts have been saved correctly.
But after restarting KMail the shortcuts don't work anymore (and they 
also don't appear in the menus). If you open the shortcut configuration 
dialog the shortcuts are still listed. After pressing OK (without 
changing anything) the shortcuts work again.
Conclusion:
It seems that the shortcut initialization doesn't work. Is this KMail's 
fault? Please note that it worked without problems with the old KAccel 
classes.

Problem #2 (this is maybe related):
Bind some key on-the-fly to some menu entry (i.e. select the menu entry 
and hold the LMB down while pressing the desired shortcut). Although 
the chosen shortcut appears now in the menu it doesn't work. The 
shortcut is also _not_ listed in the shortcut configuration. With the 
old KAccel classes this worked flawless, i.e. the on-the-fly defined 
shortcuts even survived program restarts.

Problem #3:
If one defines shortcuts on the fly it's possible to bind the same 
shortcut to as many menu entries as one wants. Is this the new 
1-Shortcut-for-Everything technology ;-) ?
With the old KAccel classes an already used shortcut could not be reused 
which is of course the correct behaviour.

Regards,
Ingo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE8TfR6GnR+RTDgudgRAu6PAJ0YA4bLTsh92B3cGLzKH+UC06dWWACgoLjL
mam2wpVMHN5faKFerh/84Fo=
=Ahj9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]