From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#16923: 24.3.50; reression: `set-frame-size' loses mode line Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 20:28:10 +0100 Message-ID: <5335CD4A.7030402@gmx.at> References: <291bd9d5-923f-440a-821a-06f585557e67@default> <5318AFD9.4000208@gmx.at> <8be91728-fcea-4e74-afff-db6a55b52985@default> <5318C478.1090007@gmx.at> <0f1c6cae-f9cd-4a2b-a662-bcc4116daafc@default> <5318E810.7000705@gmx.at> <531977B2.8030109@gmx.at> <531A0655.5040400@gmx.at> <5e0232ee-58e3-42a3-8102-e12e8e605b2b@default> <531A11BE.5070300@gmx.at> <738285f8-0119-49cd-b5b5-7e9607fadff3@default> <531ADEBC.9030200@gmx.at> <1cb471a0-5db3-4c77-90ff-ed8aa2c9bd0b@default> <531B6875.6030406@gmx.at> <03e5d7cc-2348-42e4-9e39-1166b120ea2b@default> <531B7564.6030700@gmx.at> <68c9bbe6-4347-4b80-8860-8b76e08f1137@default> <531C72F2.4080608@gmx.at> <2bd68fd8-79a5-49be-80fe-c53d4a689320@default> <531CAF45.4090307@gmx.at> <531D8024.6000501@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1396034954 19349 80.91.229.3 (28 Mar 2014 19:29:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:29:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 16923@debbugs.gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 28 20:29:23 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WTcSv-0004CX-PD for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 20:29:21 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35646 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WTcSv-0005bm-DF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 15:29:21 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34720) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WTcSk-0005XZ-JT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 15:29:18 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WTcSd-0000I8-43 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 15:29:10 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:53950) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WTcSd-0000I3-17 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 15:29:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WTcSc-000544-D8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 15:29:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:29:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 16923 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 16923-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B16923.139603490219418 (code B ref 16923); Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:29:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 16923) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Mar 2014 19:28:22 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55131 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WTcRw-000536-K9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 15:28:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:55633) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WTcRt-00052t-8X for 16923@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 15:28:18 -0400 Original-Received: from [188.22.32.47] ([188.22.32.47]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MRjd7-1WeIc91Mfh-00Szzd; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 20:28:12 +0100 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:5dQUySDRZvJDwvYhqFKC5tCPmt0IWgYCj6ZZV7BNnnVlbkc87T3 rOiR4h6nk/7fifRrfIcmlcFbpSStxdW524F+eHinBmB7lqm+Z/rT7Qknjums1/ksatZ7hma Dc3YPMXPOm1wx77EHAS46CpmCa2rMUc24jJUjh3Q3QED6GcPb7ktHLhLUKViFHUKO+iKwFP uH2NWhG8SrI5tc0Ihf1tA== X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:87496 Archived-At: > 1. Ensure, I think, that the only calls to `set-frame-size' are from > my calling `fit-frame' interactively (via C-x C-_). Nothing on > `post-command-hook' that invokes `set-frame-size', for instance. > > 2. Resized a frame manually (with the mouse), so that the next call > to `fit-frame' would actually change the size (to fit the buffer text). > > 3. C-x C-_ (`fit-frame'), which fit the frame, with no loss of the > mode line. > > 4. C-x C-_ again, which fit the frame (as a no-op, no size change > needed), this time with loss of the mode line (the bug). > > Attached is the log, *window-frame-dump*. After #3, I added a > line of zeros to the buffer, to make clear where the second call to > `fit-frame' (hence `set-frame-size') occurred. Thanks. The problem is that while in the first dump Windows and Emacs agree about the frame's pixel height as frame pixel: 511 x 528 cols/lines: 73 x 44 units: 7 x 12 ^^^ frame text pixel: 490 x 528 cols/lines: 70 x 44 tool: 0 scroll: 21 fringe: 0 border: 0 right: 2 bottom: 2 w32-rect: (0 0 519 608), (0 0 511 528) ^^^ they disagree in all remaining dumps frame pixel: 728 x 828 cols/lines: 104 x 69 units: 7 x 12 ^^^ frame text pixel: 707 x 828 cols/lines: 101 x 69 tool: 0 scroll: 21 fringe: 0 border: 0 right: 2 bottom: 2 w32-rect: (0 0 736 884), (0 0 728 804) ^^^ by 24 pixels, incidentally (maybe) the equivalent of two lines of 12 pixels. Please try two things now: (1) Repeat the test once with a default character height of 11 pixels and once with say 14 pixels so we can tell whether the two lines paradigm holds. (2) Try to replace `fit-frame' by (set-frame-size nil 101 69) so we can eliminate `fit-frame' as possible source of the problem and have an easier repeatable scenario. martin