From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#37630: 27.0.50; image-mode-fit-frame doesn't Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2019 18:12:40 +0200 Message-ID: <87d0f71aiv.fsf@gnus.org> References: <83v9t34kxv.fsf@gnu.org> <877e5hb3yo.fsf@gnus.org> <01C6CC54-E926-470A-9736-41498FC7A25F@gnu.org> <871rvp86ks.fsf@gnus.org> <83sgo4zfnf.fsf@gnu.org> <0d475083-0f51-ed60-95f4-970fa67df241@gmx.at> <871rvn2q8v.fsf@gnus.org> <831rvnxm1s.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="190977"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 37630@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 08 18:13:23 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iHs71-000nag-67 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 18:13:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58198 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iHs70-0000d7-0T for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 12:13:22 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39280) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iHs6i-0000cx-K0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 12:13:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iHs6h-0005iA-GY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 12:13:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:42478) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iHs6h-0005i1-Ca for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 12:13:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iHs6g-0006KF-CA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 12:13:03 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2019 16:13:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 37630 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 37630-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B37630.157055116724291 (code B ref 37630); Tue, 08 Oct 2019 16:13:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 37630) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Oct 2019 16:12:47 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51299 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iHs6R-0006Jj-51 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 12:12:47 -0400 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:39036) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iHs6P-0006JZ-5V for 37630@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 12:12:45 -0400 Original-Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=marnie) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iHs6L-0007BE-0W; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 18:12:43 +0200 In-Reply-To: <831rvnxm1s.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 08 Oct 2019 19:02:39 +0300") 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: 209.51.188.43 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:168661 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > Why are we calculating the size in lines instead of pixels? Could > that be the source of the problem? Yeah, I wondered that, too. Perhaps it's a historical artefact (I think the pixel-wise options were added later?), but I think that perhaps we do want to resize the frame on a line basis: We don't want to have half a line at the bottom of the frame. Perhaps? I don't really understand the utility of this command, though. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no