I've been trying everything I can think of to get a particular instance of '/usr/bin/xterm' NOT to group with other instances. It would be a great productivity aid for me to be able to click on a particular xterm instance in the task bar without having to search through the list of running xterms, which can be quite large (> 20 items) for my typical usage. I have tried : 1. Creating a modified xterm.desktop in ~/.local/share/applications , NOT called xterm desktop, and ensuring it uses a copy of the xterm icon NOT called 'debian-xterm-3' . Tasks created by installing and clicking on this task bar icon still group with xterm. 2. Creating a copy of the xterm program called ${my_special_name}-xterm , and changing the modified desktop file to run it instead - still no luck - instances are still grouped along with other xterm instances. Since in Task Manager settings, I have 'By Program Name' selected ( the only option ) with Sorting being 'Manually', and instances of /usr/bin/${my_special_name}-xterm are being grouped with instances of 'xterm' , I can only conclude that Task Manager 4.11.11 is failing in its attempt to group task manager icons by program name . Please could someone who knows tell me how Plasma group 'By Program Name' works and how to get two differenctly named copies of xterm to group differently . Thanks! Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Copy /usr/bin/xterm to /usr/bin/${some_other_name}-xterm 2. Run /usr/bin/${some_other_name}-xterm 3. Instances of /usr/bin/${some_other_name} group in the taskbar with instances of xterm . Plasma task manager fails to group task manager icons by program name. Actual Results: Instances of /usr/bin/${some_other_name} group in the taskbar with instances of xterm . Expected Results: Instances of /usr/bin/${some_other_name} should have their own group , because I have selected 'group by program name' and the programs have different names.
Created attachment 89379 [details] desktop file for xterm-for-top Here's an example, trying to create an icon for xterm running the 'top' program that does NOT group with other instances of xterm . I copied the xterm desktop file to 'top.desktop', and copied /usr/bin/xterm to /usr/bin/xterm-for-top , and ps shows programs created by clicking on this icon they under totally distinct names: jvasdias 3658 2968 0 12:07 ? 00:00:00 /usr/bin/xterm -fa Andale Mono -fs 10 -fg white -bg black jvasdias 8752 2968 0 13:19 ? 00:00:00 /bin/sh -c xterm-for-top -fa 'Andale Mono' -fs 6 -fg white -bg black -T TOP@jvasdias -n TOP@jvasdias -e top </dev/null >/dev/null 2>&1 Yet they are still put into the same task manager group. How can I get instances of /usr/bin/xterm-for-top to be put into a different task manager group? Still, the icon groups with other xterm icons.1
Created attachment 89380 [details] desktop file for other xterm instances The is the desktop file used for all other xterm instances, which runs /usr/bin/xterm . These are grouped in the same group, which is OK, but I want instances created by clicking on top.desktop which run /usr/bin/xterm-for-top to go into a different group. Is this possible ?
Created attachment 89403 [details] Example of xterm '-class' workaround.
FWIW, xterm specifically has a workaround (see https://bugsfiles.kde.org/attachment.cgi?id=89403) You can set specific groupings by changing the primary WM_CLASS string. By default, xterm sets this to 'XTerm', but using the -class option, you can set that to an arbitrary string. The example I used in the attachment is to set one window (the only ungrouped one) to have the class 'yterm' instead, which makes the task manager (both in 5.1.0 and 4.11.11) recognise it as a different application, therefore not grouping.
So ... there's no bug here then, in the end? :) The program grouping strategy groups windows on the WM_CLASS' general class string, i.e. two windows advertising themselves to be XTerm end up binned together. This seems expected behavior. I mean, you're saying "program grouping doesn't work because I have trouble getting it not to group two windows of the same app", which seems a bit strange to me :).