From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#50184: emacsclient -n should clear the minibuffer Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 15:23:02 +0300 Message-ID: <83h7fdvhll.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87sfyzm1a2.5.fsf@jidanni.org> <87fsuxkad9.fsf@gnus.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31412"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: jidanni@jidanni.org, 50184@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 25 14:24:10 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mIrww-0007tL-RD for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 14:24:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34796 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIrwv-0000pQ-BZ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 08:24:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42564) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIrwo-0000ow-VK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 08:24:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:34464) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIrwo-0004Vg-Na for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 08:24:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mIrwo-0008D3-GH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 08:24:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:24:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 50184 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 50184-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B50184.162989420031507 (code B ref 50184); Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:24:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 50184) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Aug 2021 12:23:20 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46010 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mIrw4-0008C3-Ao for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 08:23:20 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:54536) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mIrvx-0008Bl-Lx for 50184@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 08:23:14 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:44960) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIrvs-0004Fo-0i; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 08:23:04 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:4813 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIrvr-0002Da-Ja; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 08:23:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87fsuxkad9.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Wed, 25 Aug 2021 13:54:42 +0200) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:212619 Archived-At: > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 13:54:42 +0200 > Cc: 50184@debbugs.gnu.org > > > That the date is still sitting there is weird. > > When reusing the Emacs frame, it seems kinda natural to not touch the > minibuffer area -- I can imagine that some people have work flows that > depend on not losing the message. > > Anybody got an opinion here? I also don't see why emacsclient should produce the same behavior as an internal command. We only clear the echo area when the next interactive command arrives, and emacsclient doesn't invoke any commands interactively.