From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#53636: 29.0.50; face-remapping broken on master Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2022 07:08:29 +0100 Message-ID: <87k0e5vqjm.fsf@gnus.org> References: <87o83tib13.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtjd8485.fsf@gnus.org> <83a6fd9glm.fsf@gnu.org> <835yq19dk1.fsf@gnu.org> <87czk97yt6.fsf@gnus.org> <8335l49jwu.fsf@gnu.org> <835ypz8zbm.fsf@gnu.org> <87fsp2v0ky.fsf@gnus.org> <83leyu73i8.fsf@gnu.org> <87k0edrvxm.fsf@gnus.org> <83sft15egx.fsf@gnu.org> <871r0loxr9.fsf@gnus.org> <83mtj85tm1.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnibn48c.fsf@gnus.org> <8335kz4tgu.fsf@gnu.org> <87ee4hg7g6.fsf@gnus.org> <83y22p21na.fsf@gnu.org> <871r0haqzr.fsf@gnus.org> <8335kw1n9u.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtj34mdj.fsf@gnus.org> <837da6yb0j.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9728"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 53636@debbugs.gnu.org, tsdh@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 08 07:09:40 2022 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 1nHJh6-0002MS-Ne for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 07:09:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56988 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nHJh4-0003xL-Qb for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 01:09:39 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:42122) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nHJgg-0003uw-VO for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 01:09:14 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:50933) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nHJgU-0007vv-41 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 01:09:14 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nHJgT-000675-Vz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 01:09:01 -0500 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 Feb 2022 06:09:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 53636 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: confirmed Original-Received: via spool by 53636-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B53636.164430052123469 (code B ref 53636); Tue, 08 Feb 2022 06:09:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 53636) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Feb 2022 06:08:41 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44830 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nHJg9-00066T-3c for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 01:08:41 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:47996) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nHJg7-00066F-Df for 53636@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 01:08:39 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=IfrYIOVYiRHvVdM07yLEyj1uuO+7RpBA0ms75FOXglg=; b=ReEmBInrDi8Fdt/fFl+Y7/UZyQ V4XYy94TcFY6jgpJDsku+FevTwEyWrb1BeV+xvoGruewCyQtB2rndK5PWaU/0jdLVXKWixiLCkB1k pH9swQ1q7fQxHR4IPNmuK6apV3Z3piutKALcRBUBfnPJRuArBKTrqI7GoqENnna3PE7k=; Original-Received: from [84.212.220.105] (helo=giant) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nHJfy-0001cO-BZ; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 07:08:33 +0100 Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAABGdBTUEAALGPC/xhBQAAACBj SFJNAAB6JgAAgIQAAPoAAACA6AAAdTAAAOpgAAA6mAAAF3CculE8AAAAElBMVEWooZvx7uZjXVqE fnkyLi3///8QUN7IAAAAAWJLR0QF+G/pxwAAAAd0SU1FB+YCCAYCFJ/c4/0AAAG6SURBVDjLZZMN coQgDIWDeABsL+AEDpBCT0Bz/zP1PWTVdTO7I+Yj/1Fku8sStpRiVVWx7Sn2FQn2N5OEnw4RtXAH AfpMX6JZwhYusKkCdgITyASyhUV/khaCFqPJYSMxVKvaWgXgI7dhlGLLVU33qAMgXIM/lCDMp2uu wwKSq0lkKL6UPUmcQNUijeo49y3VE+TW2gTeLe4q8QTIos1r8W+RxJTyAIx5REfVkCWLoZJpOszh FOmnaImVJxbKGM60RjNkO1s8ktmlNnlOIzU4Wqx+ACAUtMinhYQR9tMijWm/W8yXmdAl3383LliY MVm8rf0MjkCVY0gTCC8ZOlM6hrlxeskIDMuQutamE2Br2gC8gh5q7YLeRosoWMKvdzE5Fq7LWC8s HaxW94xLx7AEYcYOS2vFXXMW9tddrikoAPzXCXi+gwz/B6B0ant5nR7A6eKlH64I6GaqJoCOiBne 9Vi4ad1cTzewjocrHks+8qRkrTJv9MXfPJUJfF9vWprK68al7yLrCe7XsTz+CUZv3MsTqBkrqg+L zj1fvHMAd8BvSuLq+3IDvXQsP6X4Xq7uWqAWf3z6xQn+AWl4oE3+7z5XAAAAJXRFWHRkYXRlOmNy ZWF0ZQAyMDIyLTAyLTA4VDA2OjAyOjIwKzAwOjAww14+UQAAACV0RVh0ZGF0ZTptb2RpZnkAMjAy Mi0wMi0wOFQwNjowMjoyMCswMDowMLIDhu0AAAAASUVORK5CYII= X-Now-Playing: Melanie de Biasio's _Blackened Cities_: "Blackened Cities" In-Reply-To: <837da6yb0j.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 07 Feb 2022 17:03:24 +0200") 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:226308 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > And what happens when you call make-frame from another buffer is not a > bug? Is face-remapping-alist supposed to affect the buffer in which > it is set on all frames or just on the single frame where > face-remap-add-relative was called? I'm not sure. But the current behaviour (affecting all buffers on the new frame) has to be a bug. >> The computation of the faces for the new frame. > > You mean init_frame_faces, which calls realize_basic_faces? Or do you > mean some other kind of "face computation"? I don't know? I'm looking for the code that leads to the behaviour I described. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no