From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#25943: 21.5 Frame Display Difficulties Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 09:29:31 +0200 Message-ID: <58DCB3DB.4050804@gmx.at> References: "<0b9853e8ecbdb18bb1b8c05347371a7e@127.0.0.1>" <58B925A4.4060406@gmx.at> "" <58BA900B.6040708@gmx.at> "<49adf8e1615512ac19189d75b5e04315@127.0.0.1>" <58BE8138.1040607@gmx.at> "<142b4d1d519a6bf87a5fe320d9eeb419@127.0.0.1>" <58C118CA.8020908@gmx.at> <2395d7c6fbe7358c894bc1406ffcbf45@127.0.0.1> <58C3CF94.3080604@gmx.at> <58D38075.2030409@gmx.at> <58DB63ED.8060305@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1490859019 6803 195.159.176.226 (30 Mar 2017 07:30:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:30:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "25943@debbugs.gnu.org" <25943@debbugs.gnu.org> To: david@ngdr.net Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 30 09:30:16 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ctUX5-00010L-Gt for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 09:30:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34110 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ctUXB-0006br-He for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 03:30:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40154) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ctUX2-0006Wp-OV for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 03:30:09 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ctUWx-00010l-Pu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 03:30:08 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:53656) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ctUWx-0000zw-Ls for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 03:30:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ctUWx-0007In-A3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 03:30:03 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:30:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 25943 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 25943-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B25943.149085899828029 (code B ref 25943); Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:30:03 +0000 Original-Received: (at 25943) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Mar 2017 07:29:58 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51855 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ctUWs-0007I0-19 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 03:29:58 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:63846) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ctUWp-0007Hl-RM for 25943@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 03:29:56 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([213.162.68.113]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Mb8HX-1caajD1iuJ-00KgFt; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 09:29:44 +0200 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:z+Op9xAI3w0bsQ8713l6cXvLPWxvaDmym7mGJip9KH+HEhCqkW7 V33K7wtr3xZfQaC5HWUc240mbqpAtZj+gYqA9hhr8+QWwx97LeuCJAheGaZZEBWLTdVGgTz HGLELFB3Vv4bpAWuxouZbJwxgfV05lFV6jKgUDOx6c1UuWIJJEhORQIneuXR6YEX+9Krwdh 2uC9rFPALSl7fMm3Mq7ow== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:tBEa0gwo3Cs=:100Z/iLCAGYW8YpgfWgAzt htmyhf//nwW1eZRffYdOwrW3wuSfD46qdZL6pESpoUsm9orWON+jWe6whBMN8fcUfAUbw9/iY 1zAJ1sZk98LpFe+LyYwpu5zjFvdAzIm+48IN/ABoKooYqIQnKgAHn07gLy2Aebu5eQO//GUoO VrEQfl0xPyKl4pR4W/HAnzaICQ1x+EmcVxFrO/o//GBgA6rYGGPOYVVkc8pTO/RTXus1DaEfH Vp+fYYiBiKygPGlkIvqX6LcWJwRh7GC7+YNa9uoq7SIkcrV2GtenMUwvLfq5ccDbgvj7mbzky UybnFp0djrc6lJETSb6QRWbVibhI0F3tPUdlJjZTDFGNMTnpEKt9U6ukgAmcg9XcpRhwcmWzZ VjPDbnBWJMT1TCTw19t/+bv7kSwmradfNQI83WwAUCpWcraRp7y2JT9zEGd2Vx5MzS3zxwhfP 4BVHS2FbcmRxqfHtYZqfMdknFS2Ztwb253moOh9j6DVUGZLWDruHwXNezd4ndOqo1Ddj7s/9Y 0PX3/uBzB1HaGpM2+tWqd6ya5pUjSUSXE7KDKmGXmNsWeX2u17muWDXHsAOXFUzvaBPSBxPwA +oMLstVKHFLU70mr8Fspf4TgP4sXpJrHjnB3D8XTBAnID5OHvRGzqLNO49gBg3YYB9juloU5T vW+0eGkvDDzB6T0ZHWhNTPDytx2BbwduBDqjgFxJGE9jRaS7X7r0xWKhpVe4KTnTJ/k93uWMm thALQp2XW7DENvnujB+TFB50YujFAT8K47eCrrHP5GfbGU6PkFrFiqxjQUSvqdIQJFXVFqAg X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:131083 Archived-At: > I did not think that this would be important. I attach a run for 23.2 > this time. FYI, it turns out that the code must be > (id (eval (frame-parameter... in order to handle parameters such as (+ > -9) Hmm... I thought all your Emacs 23.2 frames were on-screen. You mean in order to use the same test procedure for both 23.2 and 25.2, I presume. > ;; Run 5. > > ;; In C Right Bottom frame, misplaced at Left Top. > (frame-geometry) > > ( > (outer-position -9 . 30) > (outer-size 836 . 447) > (external-border-size 10 . 10) > (title-bar-size 0 . 27) > (menu-bar-external . t) > (menu-bar-size 0 . 0) > (tool-bar-external . t) > (tool-bar-position . top) > (tool-bar-size 0 . 0) > (internal-border-width . 0)) > > ;; In 4 Right Bottom frame, correctly placed at Right Bottom. > (frame-geometry) > > ( > (outer-position 1181 . 694) > (outer-size 836 . 447) > (external-border-size 10 . 10) > (title-bar-size 0 . 27) > (menu-bar-external . t) > (menu-bar-size 0 . 0) > (tool-bar-external . t) > (tool-bar-position . top) > (tool-bar-size 0 . 0) > (internal-border-width . 0)) I didn't make myself clear enough. A frame gets misplaced at the left top of your screen because its position was miscalculated in a way that would have put the frame off-screen. Since you likely use one display only, your window manager then puts the frame at some default place (the -9 and 30 values in your case). Here it puts them right at the top left display corner. `frame-geometry' won't reveal anything new wrt whether a frame was misplaced that way. What I menat was to find out the differences between `fun', `arg' and `par' when the window manager places the frame more or less "correctly" where you want it like at (1181 . 694). Some frame parameters seem to affect that, like the size of the scroll, menu or tool bar and we could find out how. But according to `frame-geometry' you use neither menu nor tool bars. Right? This means that I have no clue wrt how the height of your frames gets miscalculated. And for the width I probably need the default width of your scroll bars. So I would need your `frame-geometry' output from emacs -Q plus that of (frame-parameter nil 'scroll-bar-width) in order to find out. All values reported should be (hopefully) the same regardless of how wrongly Emacs wants to place the frame and where the window manager eventually puts it. martin