From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#10224: 24.0.92; M-w inhibits echoing of prefix arguments Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 13:52:29 +0800 Message-ID: <8739cus34y.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87aa767oig.fsf@escher.fritz.box> <87wraav51r.fsf@gnu.org> <87zkf6dump.fsf@escher.fritz.box> <874nxet8pa.fsf@gnu.org> <87vcpudqhi.fsf@escher.fritz.box> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1323409997 7375 80.91.229.12 (9 Dec 2011 05:53:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 05:53:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 10224@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stephen Berman Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 09 06:53:13 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RYtOT-0005L6-Cr for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 06:53:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43759 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RYtOT-000487-2h for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 00:53:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:55354) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RYtOQ-000482-Kh for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 00:53:11 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RYtOP-0007qw-KO for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 00:53:10 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:59165) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RYtOP-0007qs-F8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 00:53:09 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RYtPG-0005Ob-4z for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 00:54:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Chong Yidong Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 05:54:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 10224 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 10224-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B10224.132341001420704 (code B ref 10224); Fri, 09 Dec 2011 05:54:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 10224) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Dec 2011 05:53:34 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RYtOn-0005Ns-Mh for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 00:53:34 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RYtOl-0005Nl-A4 for 10224@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 00:53:31 -0500 Original-Received: from [155.69.19.173] (port=47404 helo=furball) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RYtNt-000537-Cq; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 00:52:37 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87vcpudqhi.fsf@escher.fritz.box> (Stephen Berman's message of "Tue, 06 Dec 2011 10:00:25 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 00:54:02 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:54829 Archived-At: Stephen Berman writes: > It's definitely not a normal delay. But your failure to reproduce it > (it's 100% reproducible for me) made me suspicious, so I switched to > another desktop environment, and sure enough, the echoing behavior after > M-w was normal. So this appears to be a problem just with LXDE, which I > used for the first time a few days ago. I have no idea what is causing > it: M-w has no desktop function in LXDE AFAICT and aside from the > no-echo problem works as usual in Emacs; moreover, I just determined > that the no-echo problem does not happen with emacs -q -nw started from > the LXTerminal. I have no idea what LXDE could be doing that could cause this. If you add the (redisplay t) line discussed earlier in this thread, does the problem go away on LXDE?