From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#16647: OT: window-resizing cursor for minibuffer (Imprecisions with window-resizing cursors) Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 09:18:35 +0200 Message-ID: <83wqgev12s.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87y51qnlfe.fsf@gmail.com> <52FE0059.4080508@gmx.at> <8738jlk6zn.fsf@moondust.localdomain> <52FE5FA0.6020202@gmx.at> <87lhxdgvcc.fsf@moondust.localdomain> <530093B0.50501@gmx.at> <87ob26x6pl.fsf@moondust.localdomain> <871tyyh0am.fsf@moondust.localdomain> <5307A0B4.3070003@gmx.at> <87fvnchwgz.fsf@moondust.localdomain> <53086B2A.4020804@gmx.at> <87txbrrphk.fsf@moondust.localdomain> <87eh2vgfph.fsf@gmail.com> <5308F1DC.6010108@gmx.at> <87mwhj9da6.fsf@gmail.com> <87eh2usmf3.fsf@moondust.localdomain> <5309D33E.1020005@gmx.at> <87txbp2rqp.fsf@moondust.localdomain> <530F990A.6000309@gmx.at> <87eh2ojc2c.fsf@moondust.localdomain> <8338j3ybqv.fsf@gnu.org> <877g8fxhz1.fsf_-_@moondust.localdomain> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1393658350 8849 80.91.229.3 (1 Mar 2014 07:19:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2014 07:19:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 16647@debbugs.gnu.org, esabof@gmail.com To: nljlistbox2@gmail.com (N. Jackson) Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 01 08:19:17 2014 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 1WJeCb-0006gP-Dl for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 08:19:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54468 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJeCa-000611-Gy for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 02:19:16 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35977) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJeCS-00060D-Bb for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 02:19:13 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJeCM-00020S-QY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 02:19:08 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:44086) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJeCM-0001zu-Jq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 02:19:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WJeCM-00076C-CC for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 02:19:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 07:19:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 16647 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: X-Debbugs-Original-Cc: rudalics@gmx.at, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, esabof@gmail.com Original-Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.139365833227271 (code B ref -1); Sat, 01 Mar 2014 07:19:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Mar 2014 07:18:52 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45268 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WJeCB-00075n-NR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 02:18:52 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34218) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WJeC9-00075c-FJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 02:18:49 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJeC3-0001go-PN for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 02:18:49 -0500 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:54411) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJeC3-0001gk-ME for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 02:18:43 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35923) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJeBy-0005z8-IM for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 02:18:43 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJeBt-0001ey-AL for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 02:18:38 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout25.012.net.il ([80.179.55.181]:43111) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJeBt-0001eW-2C for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 02:18:33 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout25.012.net.il by mtaout25.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N1Q00600WNJ4T00@mtaout25.012.net.il> for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 09:16:55 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by mtaout25.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N1Q0052EXK6W230@mtaout25.012.net.il>; Sat, 01 Mar 2014 09:16:55 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <877g8fxhz1.fsf_-_@moondust.localdomain> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). 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: 140.186.70.43 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:86427 Archived-At: > From: nljlistbox2@gmail.com (N. Jackson) > Cc: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, martin rudalics , E Sabof > Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 13:30:42 -0400 > > I'm not sure why you decided to object so adamantly to that. Because resizing the minibuffer has its own rules, different from those of other buffers. I tried what I thought you were doing and saw expected behavior, given those special rules. It is now clear that I misunderstood the description of the problem, so I apologize for my misunderstanding.