From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#56305: 29.0.50; 'yes-or-no-p' deselects minibuffer frame Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2022 18:31:42 +0000 Message-ID: References: <83h73w8f7i.fsf@gnu.org> <83zghn7ckd.fsf@gnu.org> <83zghm5evt.fsf@gnu.org> <5d86d890-9a2e-e4d6-13fb-da03285ea003@gmx.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9288"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 56305@debbugs.gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, acm@muc.de To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 08 20:32:17 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 1o9sm1-0002Er-89 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2022 20:32:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60410 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o9sm0-0002CU-C9 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2022 14:32:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51850) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o9slm-0002A7-LJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2022 14:32:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:39270) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o9slm-0007A7-Cf for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2022 14:32:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1o9slm-0001YT-9G for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2022 14:32:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Alan Mackenzie Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2022 18:32:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 56305 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 56305-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B56305.16573051135961 (code B ref 56305); Fri, 08 Jul 2022 18:32:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 56305) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Jul 2022 18:31:53 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33167 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1o9slc-0001Y5-O4 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2022 14:31:52 -0400 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:59660 helo=mail.muc.de) by debbugs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1o9slb-0001Xs-3n for 56305@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2022 14:31:51 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 48422 invoked by uid 3782); 8 Jul 2022 18:31:44 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p4fe15b6e.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.225.91.110]) (using STARTTLS) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Jul 2022 20:31:43 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 7875 invoked by uid 1000); 8 Jul 2022 18:31:42 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Submission-Agent: TMDA/1.3.x (Ph3nix) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de 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:236465 Archived-At: Hello again, Martin. On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 10:55:07 +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote: > On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 09:01:43 +0200, martin rudalics wrote: > > > I don't follow. If the WM does "Raise on focus", surely it will > > > raise the frame no matter how it acquires the focus. Such focus is > > > here essential for the working of the minibuffer. > > It should not deliberately raise a frame that already has focus. > OK. We could add an extra check for the frame already having the focus. > Is there anything else suboptimal about that proposed fix to emacs-28? > > > Is it not the case that acquiring the focus with Fx_focus_frame > > > would be better than not doing so? > > It does not restore the Emacs 26 behavior. How, precisely, does the behaviour in my proposed patch differ from that of Emacs 26? > > If you look at the reports for Bug#8856, Bug#11566 or Bug#11939, you > > might be able to imagine how much time I spent to get the behavior > > right for Drew's setup back then. It's quite sobering to see my > > efforts from that period get wasted now. What do you mean by "wasted"? What fails to work now which worked immediately after your fixes for these three bugs? > .... I'll take a look at these bug reports this evening. I've had a look at those bugs, now, albeit briefly. They do not contain concise recipes for reproducing the bugs, and anyway, I don't have a Windows system to try things out on. They are bugs where the focus ended up on the wrong frame, and it was hypothesised that this may have been because of Windows always giving the focus to newly created frames. [ .... ] > > martin -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).