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#20619: bug#21469: bug#21348: 25.0.50; Screen scaling factor >=2 causes menus, tooltips to display in the wrong place Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:21:41 +0200 Message-ID: <561D3DA5.9000801@gmx.at> References: <86twpvhjxf.fsf@gmail.com> <561D288E.7070803@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444756998 23019 80.91.229.3 (13 Oct 2015 17:23:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 17:23:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 20619@debbugs.gnu.org, 21469@debbugs.gnu.org, 21348@debbugs.gnu.org, 18429@debbugs.gnu.org To: Ryan Prior Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 13 19:23:07 2015 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 1Zm3I3-0008AE-9v for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:23:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38319 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm3I2-00028T-9F for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:23:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59920) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm3H4-0000wJ-Uy for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:22:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm3H1-0003sA-87 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:22:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:50022) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm3H1-0003rz-5j for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:22:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm3H0-0003ef-UH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:22:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 17:22:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 20619 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 20619-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B20619.144475691114015 (code B ref 20619); Tue, 13 Oct 2015 17:22:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 20619) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Oct 2015 17:21:51 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38990 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm3Go-0003dt-Nw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:21:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:59895) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm3Gl-0003dR-3i; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:21:47 -0400 Original-Received: from [188.22.238.113] ([188.22.238.113]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lkiqm-1aKHYj42dg-00aSNp; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:21:46 +0200 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:55H+aAeVjtvLuHXy8ztASJu8BAqKGuypfFlEeEaJovFSpATIPJh lej5hcbZwBhuXW6nAOTYcuuj/JQwhdGfuG0azlhGbRp6e+Go35EaR61hzwsASGDawzI4U3v d+fPlGo9p3P8MMYK6I7gsb1yFvTpfhTKEy6qPfadPnJGvMubpCqdmTyyWoy+pq+EaC2Jbfm oSebKsVgO7P+QprKn//Rw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:KnKuE9vOKBs=:Y6VDbJTqwowo4MH2W4zvoy 428/0lN7grKqvxeczOLwuwJCu1SAf4k7Rz5yWmODAzRHnyqwKo0TisvjNTLem5HU0KgOjpiXR QP5PxfEj/1/7Sk/dg1cuAfya3Emyx7RUeDPlasOdi3+lO5Y5o2yOcQnSUazrUY31RBmTr/Bue kOaCAYvLh9Dq7skcUUy2LjDFiwnhBoeKfXvki24x/dOMZsl5ejgY/HDwdesfTRirIUSt0mUP7 lfVasBGkK4ml86At1Erq0A8CzLwu1s8HSVq6NnnhoVFMlUmGcGi5/cANf/dWDDXHkOehXavGj 1gnbp3fOxIUIQqZnnkumQUE2PjgQAAr/jMErkJ3th6DTNRD4kSuXvctasMPcOUaSHBH9sOsEZ aGzzEpSJrz7rnW7FBPehLn11nGG8iGou6DuBtKBYoRAqn6HXCU9idBSaIAvUsHcB+pLpL+5NO UJ6ZImJzbcGU/vP40sIQDHIjltJwSFe1Pevc7bnN5jhXoJvnkkLwuwtZvtSJwK+sy30Vm1BN2 ob/wBtzp8m1Zp5moEY8GvfZr06X/hGorCFZDvDgRug4nIKjrql/jA98S7DpWMBS2PyLBMV5H6 NfU2VsucadN6e5bSRPm3/W6SbxnQV8oo+ogUiDjAWRMGvAPvXS9Et3PO06QZdQ7C0QvDQr1JQ JiAc0YIOb9K6L6EmaUZhGKQWXDKyO5LHBjdoLxvHx8fgGLddMMemxeckbr+SZt03H4jM4jsy4 rdnwaHe3Prze3IkuskkkgPbFGRXDBs9NUx0ixxfzlMnGpo4ETB/u1YUHLAzTd1+9GmZW93w+ 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: 208.118.235.43 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:107578 Archived-At: > TABLE: `(set-frame-parameter nil 'left ,x) > _____________________________________________ > x | actual frame distance from left screen edge (px) > 0 | 20 > 500 | 520 > 1600 | 1620 > 1800 | 1772 > 2000 | 1772 > > A few observations: > 1) offset of 20 pixels > I've never noticed this issue because it doesn't affect maximized > frames. Maybe that number 20 is significant somehow, or perhaps this > is a separate bug. The first time after I start `emacs -Q` and set the= > left frame edge to 0, the frame flashes momentarily into place flush > with the left screen edge, for perhaps a single video frame, and then > jumps 20 pixels to the right. This might be window manager related. Can you try again with the =E2=80=98user-position=E2=80=99 frame parameter non-nil? Like (modify-frame-parameters nil '((left . 0) (user-position . t))) > Subsequent calls to set the left frame > edge to 0 do not trigger this flashing behavior. You mean on a subsequent attempt the frame is flushed left or still at position 20. What happens when you try something similar with the =E2=80= =98top=E2=80=99 parameter? > 2) numbers are proportional, modulo the unexplained offset > We do not see doubling behavior here. I have added no scaling code > pertaining to frame positioning. Does that mean the offset of 20 pixels appears with scaling turned off and on? > 3) frame "sticks" to the right screen edge > Given the width of the frame I was testing with, when the left frame > edge is 1772 pixels from the left screen edge, the right frame edge is= > flush with the right screen edge. Setting the left frame edge to a > greater value does not result in a further movement of the frame. So the window manager probably constrains frame positioning. What happens with a frame larger than the screen size? And does =E2=80=98set-mouse-absolute-pixel-position=E2=80=99 work normall= y? martin