From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#25228: 25.1; GNU emacs 25.1: custom-set-faces from init file ~/.emacs ignored Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 20:39:14 +0200 Message-ID: <83inqe30od.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83oa074y73.fsf@gnu.org> <5858289B.2070500@gmx.at> <83fulj4uhu.fsf@gnu.org> <58584121.1070404@gmx.at> <83d1gn4pl2.fsf@gnu.org> <58590F28.9040309@gmx.at> <83vaue37ib.fsf@gnu.org> <58595B67.7030305@gmx.at> <83pokm34yd.fsf@gnu.org> <58596B9B.4050001@gmx.at> <83mvfq32pg.fsf@gnu.org> <585975DB.3040203@gmx.at> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1482259217 14217 195.159.176.226 (20 Dec 2016 18:40:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 18:40:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rostislav.svoboda@gmail.com, 25228@debbugs.gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 20 19:40:09 2016 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 1cJPKZ-0002Gc-Rz for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 19:40:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52951 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPKe-0001WP-Cn for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:40:12 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49964) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPKY-0001Uj-7Q for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:40:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPKU-0004qW-Cw for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:40:06 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:33872) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPKU-0004qQ-9m for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:40:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPKU-0000qm-2y for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:40:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 18:40:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 25228 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 25228-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B25228.14822591803230 (code B ref 25228); Tue, 20 Dec 2016 18:40:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 25228) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Dec 2016 18:39:40 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49271 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPK7-0000q2-ME for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:39:39 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58922) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPK6-0000po-Jq for 25228@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:39:38 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPK0-0004mH-P2 for 25228@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:39:33 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:35801) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPJu-0004lM-Tt; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:39:26 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3123 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cJPJt-0008Dc-BR; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:39:26 -0500 In-reply-to: <585975DB.3040203@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Tue, 20 Dec 2016 19:18:03 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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:127260 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 19:18:03 +0100 > From: martin rudalics > CC: werner@suse.de, 25228@debbugs.gnu.org, rostislav.svoboda@gmail.com > > > So all this disaster happens because 96.281588447653434 compares not > > equal to 96, is that right? > > Here ;-) > > That's why I wanted Werner to counter-check. And there was the original > author of this issue - Rostislav Svoboda. IIRC I tried to contact him > once but he did not respond, anyway let's try again. Thanks. > > Would the problem be solved, both for you > > and for Werner, if we compare these values after rounding them to the > > nearest integer? It looks to me that xsettings.c reads the new value > > as an integer to begin with, so it makes no sense to compare > > fractional values. And AFAIK about DPI (which is very little, and > > nothing about Gsettings and Xft), the DPI values are always integers. > > Nothing guarantees that such a silly discrepancy does not show up > somehwere else. I'm not sure I understand what discrepancy you had in mind. Can you elaborate? > But I certainly won't mind using this as workaround for Emacs 25.2. If it works, sure.