Instead of injecting `-fvisibility=hidden` depending on a compiler check
ourselves, let Meson do it for us.
This also avoids us having to filter `-fvisibility=hidden` when reusing
the common compiler flags.
The previous code would include CSS padding/margin/border in the
measurement and that is wrong.
Until commit a96c75ff02 this was not actually visible, but afterwards
listitems were allocated 16px too wide.
Test included
There are two possible interpretations of "expected failure": either
the test *must* fail (exactly the inverse of an ordinary test, with
success becoming failure and failure becoming success), or the test
*may* fail (with success intended, but failure possible in some
environments). Autotools had the second interpretation, which seems
more useful in practice, but Meson has the first.
Instead of using should_fail, we can put the tests in one of two new
suites: "flaky" is intended for tests that succeed or fail unpredictably
according to the test environment or chance, while "failing" is for
tests that ought to succeed but currently never do as a result of a
bug or missing functionality. With a sufficiently new version of Meson,
the flaky and failing tests are not run by default, but can be requested
by running a setup that does not exclude them, with a command like:
meson test --setup=x11_unstable --suite=flaky --suite=failing
As a bonus, now that we're setting up setups and their excluded suites
programmatically, the gsk-compare-broadway tests are also excluded by
default when running the test setup for a non-broadway backend.
When running the tests in CI, --suite=gtk overrides the default
exclude_suites, so we have to specify --no-suite=flaky and
--no-suite=failing explicitly.
This arrangement is inspired by GNOME/glib!2987, which was contributed
by Marco Trevisan.
Signed-off-by: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>
This checks mainly that we do the right thing wrt PangoAlignment
weirdness.
0.25 and 0.75 are set to 0.0 and 1.0 currently because of Pango
limitations (and no desire to manually move lines).
But if that were to be fixed, both the ref and the test should update in
the same way and things should just keep working.
This brings back a subset of what quit-mnemonic.ui tested for, but
trying a lot harder to trigger the label overdrawing its allocation,
which will cause the text to be cut off when clipping is happening.
It should not be an issue at all with GTK4, but keeping that test around
is a good idea.
I can't quite figure out what this test was meant
to test, and how to make it do so in a way that
does not fall afoul of rendering issues in the GL
renderer and rounding differences in pango.
Can't win with reftests.
Assume a vbox with 2 wrapping labels saying
Hello World
Hi Ho
being measured for their minimum width for 3 rows of text.
This should be layouted like
Hello
World
Hi Ho
and measured accordingly.
However, previously this was layouted as
Hello World
Hi Ho
with 1.5 lines being assigned to both labels.
That will obviously not compute the above wrapping which clearly
results in a smaller min width.
A reftest testing exactly this was included.
Having a short text and a large max-width-chars should request the
natural width of the text, not the limit from max-width-chars.
This caused huge message dialogs.
Reftests added.
Use a label that is long enough to require wrapping and force it into a
hardcoded width. Use a sentence where all the words have the same size
to not get unwanted wrapping behavior.
Also append a 2nd row to check that the first row gets the proper height
allocated.
Found by Marco Melorio.
For size -1 in the opposite orientation, GtkBoxLayout used to measure
the children based on their min size in the box's orientation instead of
-1. That wasn't really intended, but was a side effect of how the sizing
code did (not) distribute extra size above the minimum size.
This is clearly not what we want.
What we want is measuring the orientation as is for size -1. Then we
want to just take the maximum of all children and use that.
A reftest is incldued that ensures a vbox wraps a label just like an
hbox does.
If a URL can't be loaded, we might end up with a NULL file. Handle that
case properly by creating an invalid image instead and don't crash or
complain to stderr when files are NULL.
This was broken since 0886ade182
A new reftest has been included. We need a reftest instead of a
CSS parser test, because the error only becomes visible when
compute()ing the actual image.
Fixes#4373
Have square images in the following sizes:
* 20
* 100
* 150
* 200
* 300
and place them in a can-shrink Picture allocated at the sizes:
* 200x100
* 100x200
and set align to center/center.
That's 10 combinations and they should all do the right thing.
We were only applying <binding> elements when the
object is constructed, which can be triggered by
various things (e.g. a <style> element). Defer
this until we reach </object>, so we can be sure
that we pick up all the bindings.
Testcase included.
Fixes: #4147
The GtkBuilder parser constructs the object e.g.
when handling a <binding> element. There may be
more <property> elements after it, which we were
just not applying. Fix that by always applying
property when we see </object>. To do that, we
need to track the applied status per property.
Test included.
Fixes: #4208
This also switches the rendering code from using gsk_render_node_draw()
to gsk_renderer_render_texture().
Some tests are broken with the GL renderer, so this patch forces the
Cairo renderer until they get fixed.
The test used to test that GtkBox ordered it's children left-to-right in
CSS, no matter the text direction or pack-type.
But there is neither a pack-type anymore nor does GTK4 do that.
So that test has been broken for yers, it just didn't render anything
wrong.
This was comparing the included image-missing icon
with the one in the current icontheme on the test
system. Works fine as long as we don't change
the icons (which we just did). To avoid this, set
the icontheme to hicolor for this test, which does
not have the image-missing icon, so we end up getting
the builtin icon for both ui files.
It seems to make assumptions about text positioning that
are not holding with subpixel positioning. I'm not 100%
sure how that leads to exactly the artifacts that are seen
here, but I am just disabling the test until that is fully
understood.
It makes assumptions about text positioning that are
not holding with subpixel positioning. There is no
guarantee that the next word in a multi-word text
starts on an even pixel boundary, as it does when
you break the text into multiple, separately rendered
blocks.
