* bug#2282: Bug#2282: rmail-summary splits frame into three parts
@ 2009-11-10 2:09 Glenn Morris
2009-11-10 7:48 ` Juri Linkov
2009-11-11 17:22 ` Alfred M. Szmidt
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-11-10 2:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 2282; +Cc: Alfred M. Szmidt
(Replying to old bug)
The behaviour described in the original report happens if you make the
Emacs frame wider than `split-width-threshold'. Setting that variable
to nil will prevent it.
I don't know what to do about this. There are lots of pop-to-buffers
in rmailsum.el, and any of them could cause such behaviour.
See the confusion in bug#1806.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* bug#2282: Bug#2282: rmail-summary splits frame into three parts
2009-11-10 2:09 bug#2282: Bug#2282: rmail-summary splits frame into three parts Glenn Morris
@ 2009-11-10 7:48 ` Juri Linkov
2009-11-10 17:59 ` Stefan Monnier
2009-11-11 17:22 ` Alfred M. Szmidt
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Juri Linkov @ 2009-11-10 7:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: 2282, Alfred M. Szmidt
> The behaviour described in the original report happens if you make the
> Emacs frame wider than `split-width-threshold'. Setting that variable
> to nil will prevent it.
>
> I don't know what to do about this. There are lots of pop-to-buffers
> in rmailsum.el, and any of them could cause such behaviour.
>
> See the confusion in bug#1806.
With the current CVS after `M-x rmail-summary' I see
+---------------+---------------+
| | |
| RMAIL-summary | RMAIL |
| | |
+---------------+---------------+
| |
| RMAIL-summary |
| |
+-------------------------------+
I think for RMAIL both following layouts make equal sense
on a wide frame:
+---------------+---------------+
| | |
| RMAIL-summary | RMAIL |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
+---------------+---------------+
and
+-------------------------------+
| |
| RMAIL-summary |
| |
+-------------------------------+
| |
| RMAIL |
| |
+-------------------------------+
The question is what options are necessary to be able to configure RMAIL
window layouts? Maybe like `gnus-buffer-configuration' in Gnus?
--
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* bug#2282: Bug#2282: rmail-summary splits frame into three parts
2009-11-10 7:48 ` Juri Linkov
@ 2009-11-10 17:59 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2009-11-10 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Juri Linkov; +Cc: 2282, Alfred M. Szmidt
> With the current CVS after `M-x rmail-summary' I see
> +---------------+---------------+
> | | |
> | RMAIL-summary | RMAIL |
> | | |
> +---------------+---------------+
> | |
> | RMAIL-summary |
> | |
> +-------------------------------+
This is a bug, please someone fix it.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* bug#2282: Bug#2282: rmail-summary splits frame into three parts
2009-11-10 2:09 bug#2282: Bug#2282: rmail-summary splits frame into three parts Glenn Morris
2009-11-10 7:48 ` Juri Linkov
@ 2009-11-11 17:22 ` Alfred M. Szmidt
2009-11-12 7:24 ` Glenn Morris
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Alfred M. Szmidt @ 2009-11-11 17:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: 2282
Thanks for doing a follow up on this bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* bug#2282: Bug#2282: rmail-summary splits frame into three parts
2009-11-11 17:22 ` Alfred M. Szmidt
@ 2009-11-12 7:24 ` Glenn Morris
2009-11-12 8:19 ` martin rudalics
2009-11-12 15:41 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-11-12 7:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ams; +Cc: 2282
"Alfred M. Szmidt" wrote:
> Thanks for doing a follow up on this bug.
Could you confirm your problem goes away after:
(setq split-width-threshold nil)
I'm tempted to just replace all pop-to-buffers in rmail*.el with
(defun rmail-pop-to-buffer (buffer-or-name &optional other-window norecord)
(let (split-width-threshold)
(pop-to-buffer buffer-or-name other-window norecord)))
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* bug#2282: Bug#2282: rmail-summary splits frame into three parts
2009-11-12 7:24 ` Glenn Morris
@ 2009-11-12 8:19 ` martin rudalics
2009-11-12 15:42 ` Stefan Monnier
2009-11-12 15:41 ` Stefan Monnier
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: martin rudalics @ 2009-11-12 8:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Glenn Morris, 2282; +Cc: ams
> I'm tempted to just replace all pop-to-buffers in rmail*.el with
>
> (defun rmail-pop-to-buffer (buffer-or-name &optional other-window norecord)
> (let (split-width-threshold)
> (pop-to-buffer buffer-or-name other-window norecord)))
I suppose the following code in `rmail-new-summary' is responsible for
the behavior described earlier.
(if (and (one-window-p)
pop-up-windows
(not pop-up-frames))
;; If there is just one window, put the summary on the top.
(progn
(split-window (selected-window) rmail-summary-window-size)
(select-window (next-window (frame-first-window)))
(pop-to-buffer rmail-summary-buffer)
;; If pop-to-buffer did not use that window, delete that
;; window. (This can happen if it uses another frame.)
(if (not (eq rmail-summary-buffer
(window-buffer (frame-first-window))))
(delete-other-windows)))
(pop-to-buffer rmail-summary-buffer))
What is that code supposed to do what a simple `pop-to-buffer' cannot
accomplish? If it's to display the summary on top of the frame, then
splitting horizontally obviously won't make sense here.
martin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* bug#2282: Bug#2282: rmail-summary splits frame into three parts
2009-11-12 7:24 ` Glenn Morris
2009-11-12 8:19 ` martin rudalics
@ 2009-11-12 15:41 ` Stefan Monnier
2009-11-12 17:40 ` martin rudalics
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2009-11-12 15:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: 2282, ams
> I'm tempted to just replace all pop-to-buffers in rmail*.el with
> (defun rmail-pop-to-buffer (buffer-or-name &optional other-window norecord)
> (let (split-width-threshold)
> (pop-to-buffer buffer-or-name other-window norecord)))
No, please don't: the problem is in pop-to-buffer which should never
create 3 windows out of 1.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* bug#2282: Bug#2282: rmail-summary splits frame into three parts
2009-11-12 8:19 ` martin rudalics
@ 2009-11-12 15:42 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2009-11-12 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: martin rudalics; +Cc: 2282, ams
>> I'm tempted to just replace all pop-to-buffers in rmail*.el with
>>
>> (defun rmail-pop-to-buffer (buffer-or-name &optional other-window norecord)
>> (let (split-width-threshold)
>> (pop-to-buffer buffer-or-name other-window norecord)))
> I suppose the following code in `rmail-new-summary' is responsible for
> the behavior described earlier.
> (if (and (one-window-p)
> pop-up-windows
> (not pop-up-frames))
> ;; If there is just one window, put the summary on the top.
> (progn
> (split-window (selected-window) rmail-summary-window-size)
> (select-window (next-window (frame-first-window)))
> (pop-to-buffer rmail-summary-buffer)
> ;; If pop-to-buffer did not use that window, delete that
> ;; window. (This can happen if it uses another frame.)
> (if (not (eq rmail-summary-buffer
> (window-buffer (frame-first-window))))
> (delete-other-windows)))
> (pop-to-buffer rmail-summary-buffer))
> What is that code supposed to do what a simple `pop-to-buffer' cannot
> accomplish? If it's to display the summary on top of the frame, then
> splitting horizontally obviously won't make sense here.
Hmm... maybe I misunderstood and the problem may indeed not be in
pop-to-buffer, in the end.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* bug#2282: Bug#2282: rmail-summary splits frame into three parts
2009-11-12 15:41 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2009-11-12 17:40 ` martin rudalics
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: martin rudalics @ 2009-11-12 17:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier, 2282; +Cc: ams
> No, please don't: the problem is in pop-to-buffer which should never
> create 3 windows out of 1.
Well, we _could_ implement that ;-)
martin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-11-12 17:40 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-11-10 2:09 bug#2282: Bug#2282: rmail-summary splits frame into three parts Glenn Morris
2009-11-10 7:48 ` Juri Linkov
2009-11-10 17:59 ` Stefan Monnier
2009-11-11 17:22 ` Alfred M. Szmidt
2009-11-12 7:24 ` Glenn Morris
2009-11-12 8:19 ` martin rudalics
2009-11-12 15:42 ` Stefan Monnier
2009-11-12 15:41 ` Stefan Monnier
2009-11-12 17:40 ` martin rudalics
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).