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#43519: 28.0.50; Overlay at end of minibuf hides minibuf's real content Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 17:11:10 +0300 Message-ID: <83y2l1x5oh.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83wo0p1twr.fsf@gnu.org> <83r1qx1q9v.fsf@gnu.org> <838sd425l2.fsf@gnu.org> <83tuvrxlho.fsf@gnu.org> <83mu1jxhyd.fsf@gnu.org> <83imc7xg9h.fsf@gnu.org> <83ft7bxcjj.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37539"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 43519@debbugs.gnu.org To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 22 16:12:18 2020 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 1kKj1m-0009ei-DF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 16:12:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41712 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kKj1l-00041W-6q for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 10:12:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44482) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kKj1W-00040H-9Z for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 10:12:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:49450) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kKj1W-0005Sr-0W for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 10:12:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kKj1V-0005lg-Sj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 10:12:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 14:12:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 43519 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 43519-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B43519.160078387722117 (code B ref 43519); Tue, 22 Sep 2020 14:12:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 43519) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Sep 2020 14:11:17 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60996 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kKj0m-0005ke-M1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 10:11:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37396) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kKj0k-0005kS-Lj for 43519@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 10:11:15 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:50313) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kKj0d-0005ME-QV; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 10:11:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3595 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kKj0a-00014Y-Rj; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 10:11:07 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Gregory Heytings on Tue, 22 Sep 2020 06:57:59 +0000) 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:188688 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 06:57:59 +0000 > From: Gregory Heytings > cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 43519@debbugs.gnu.org > > > Maybe such a change in behavior is desirable (I'm not sure, and I don't > > yet have a clear idea how will Lisp programs decide which behavior to > > request), but it's a separate issue. > > Okay, so shall I file another bug just to have this same discussion again? Yes, please.