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#28605: 26.0.60; Part of leftmost character hidden Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 10:04:28 +0200 Message-ID: <59EAFF8C.9080509@gmx.at> References: <59DCCA92.8090501@gmx.at> <59DDD72B.3040003@gmx.at> <59DF2220.4030705@gmx.at> <87d15sn257.fsf@gmail.com> <59E07FC9.9050907@gmx.at> <87376n4bfb.fsf@gmail.com> <59E0B5BB.6070302@gmx.at> <87bmlb5hif.fsf@gmail.com> <59E1CC8C.9030005@gmx.at> <87mv4urtsp.fsf@gmail.com> <59E1D6FD.5060203@gmx.at> <878tgbs4ke.fsf@gmail.com> <59E5C5E0.3070103@gmx.at> <87tvyycbih.fsf@gmail.com> <59E600F3.6020905@gmx.at> <87zi8njoi8.fsf@gmail.com> <59E9ABE4.5060903@gmx.at> <87r2tyey32.fsf@gmail.com> 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 1508573131 14085 195.159.176.226 (21 Oct 2017 08:05:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 08:05:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 28605@debbugs.gnu.org To: Robert Pluim Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 21 10:05:25 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 1e5omK-0000mp-L0 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 10:05:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57013 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e5omR-0003cu-Us for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 04:05:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46650) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e5omH-0003ay-Qn for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 04:05:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e5omE-00020S-KN for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 04:05:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:44335) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e5omE-00020L-Fm for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 04:05:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e5omE-00056g-7G for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 04:05:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 08:05:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 28605 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 28605-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B28605.150857308119597 (code B ref 28605); Sat, 21 Oct 2017 08:05:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 28605) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Oct 2017 08:04:41 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53016 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e5ols-000561-Tx for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 04:04:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:49614) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e5olq-00055n-Sw for 28605@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 04:04:39 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([46.125.249.29]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MgXCF-1dtLnE43ct-00O2v1; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 10:04:32 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87r2tyey32.fsf@gmail.com> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:gkNC8qJ0QnlOC3QcIUfA6Qeidlec5w3797QkKTBWpLDesz3C/4S EU91cuz6aD720Nszm25pI3zxrocKJmhjA8BgV4sagY9Fxnm03ViKp54ZDIqvX/HcMhlqV5K 4GP+pJxsPTe26SPLFI8ghf38wHZNdxLmsKYdkCz6jbC2SikvIcYPmCZzekTeSeFEiJ2s9bb xHGZb5Lmjgtove0sNA4Mg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:vsCNMy09fZc=:EYrWqjn9dq09p3x46sqOCI 2zpo4w4lIjYGTx3eCplg3Rntv3q3Q3p0dZxRxV36uGhMqP3GvJ2spo40/ZqfAU9qOemkyyzGT W1fDdY4K9cRm5/KebYXtB4fzo0kW2MVjCSi3yQRdrJasWtcehzAy+5lBUi6YBbW5ULo9SMM99 sB6q9hbEIN6+fEJxMEDgMdJGI8D+jH+7zlkziKQVBmxt9Ka4d+NcXaPz7xUzYgcX9EBXs1ysP 15CMYuUWO1IlwISc04fqpMjVm0zVJ/S43r1wxx4VUlQOREELBHOiUghKpKuV/fdep/V+UDnfW GZkVHu4h5wq+bBLwoRGpzejhI+9mh+p57z0vPXADybBJENGXJHqhzWSoht2howSsJ78AKdRbZ rE0Kmd75ECT2GWLakYRJJVXgSQ0jLW6agixoyyzdRwdZDGZqOWvDjebkH0DdYvHZQxloIxNp1 BvY03i82RzxDS+iuN6pYXZs2BcDBtX/Y+mdDUoMAbUAvK00OVa9IQq0HMcFicdbxvFQ+PYp27 M3rjP2ErKbCoi+bAQZcu0gG/3sJQp0vPsBmmC0J24+jeXdCiWigNocDvDRKGgqjwFUufdmi43 Io2TyLdsVLV1m0lrz/1NFbNvuV/xIer6RDlRlNHb3rxTJYAL21ty5SITthkKUKwrnib+tqiOH 29YdgMIBlVmGz3gaM8LgDU4Ypf0ESESBgGu6pccZlqMzPgogDSEIZCd5aj3xvyp7FLVMAUwzb u5aNgCwJYgfEnf5X7p2CMR2G2VAO4naG2AVFan0b6qW2G5h3qy/XVTKvJjoOycSu38qez+TF 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:138800 Archived-At: >> I'm afraid you didn't test these with scroll bars turned off. So it's >> easily possible that scroll bar calculations overshadow the frame size >> adjustments we do for handling the above. Please try with scroll bars >> turned off before you test these. > > I've retested with scroll bars turned off, that doesn't make any > difference, the frame height still shrinks. So for the moment we can omit scroll bars as the lone culprit. They are too complicated - theme based size, minimum size constraints - anyway. >> One thing you could check with scroll bars on is whether changing the >> frame width (or height) and undoing that gets us back the initial size. >> For example, does evaluating the following forms >> >> (set-frame-parameter nil 'width (+ (frame-parameter nil 'width) 5)) >> (set-frame-parameter nil 'width (- (frame-parameter nil 'width) 5)) >> >> in sequence result in a frame of the same size? > > Now that's weird. That gets me back to a frame of the same *width*, > but each invocation of set-frame-parameter reduces the *height*, and > gives me: > > (emacs:24843): Gtk-CRITICAL **: gtk_distribute_natural_allocation: > assertion 'extra_space >= 0' failed > > when I reduce the width (with or without scroll bars). Are we back at > "It's a GTK bug"? Recently this was mostly due to /etc/PROBLEMS *** Emacs built with GTK+ toolkit can unexpectedly widen frames BTW I found Ola's tool and menu bar sizes very disproportionate. Are yours similarly large? Anyway, the strategy now seems to be to switch off _everything_ toolkit related (scroll bar, menu bar, tool bar and tooltips) and check whether the problem persists. If it does, something very fundamental is broken and we at least know from where to start. If it doesn't, then add each of these but never two at the same time. This should give as a next clue. martin