This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.
Ubuntu 6.10, jdk 1.6.0_02-b05, Clearlooks theme NB trunk build 070724 See the two screenshots attached. I found one reproducible way for getting the wrong background color (the grey): 1) give focus to something else than the tree, for example to editor window 2) open Tools/Options 3) close the Options 4) give focus back to the tree in Projects view -> the line background is wrong You can then restore the correct background color (the blue) for example this way: 1) get rid of the selection in the tree view, for example by showing the popup menu there by clicking with right mouse button 2) open directory chooser (e.g. open project dialog) and select an item in the tree there 3) close the directory chooser 4) select an item in the tree in Projects view -> the line background is correct
Created attachment 45584 [details] Correct (blue) background color of the selection in the tree
Created attachment 45586 [details] Wrong (grey) background color of the selection in the tree
Hm, again strange bug that goes probably to JDK/Swing/GTK team. We are not responsible for drawing selection row outside of the renderer cell and probably can't alter that. Check the SwingSet2 demo - plain JTree here has always selection background which is considered *wrong* in this issue, while other controls as List has correct background. In NetBeans, it somehow magically sometimes works, as mentioned above. I can only add that when the tree content is short (vertical scrollbar isn't visible) then background is wrong, but when tree expanded and scrollbar appears, suddenly it starts to work.
Confirmed it's JDK issue, test app written and submitted all info to JDK team. Details at http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6596287
*** Issue 97054 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
*** Issue 97050 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
*** Issue 131977 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***