From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#10135: 24.0.91; `special-display-regexps' is still not respected (again) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 22:59:39 -0500 Message-ID: References: <5A0FD164923A4D9990DBFBA39F44FC52@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1322280035 686 80.91.229.12 (26 Nov 2011 04:00:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2011 04:00:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 10135@debbugs.gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 26 05:00:31 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 1RU9RD-0001Cz-PK for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Nov 2011 05:00:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48157 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RU9RC-0005z9-To for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 23:00:26 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:36872) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RU9RA-0005z4-P2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 23:00:25 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RU9R9-0002yC-Jr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 23:00:24 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:37281) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RU9R9-0002y2-IK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 23:00:23 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RU9Sk-0004Q3-DI for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 23:02:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2011 04:02:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 10135 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 10135-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B10135.132228008316937 (code B ref 10135); Sat, 26 Nov 2011 04:02:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 10135) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Nov 2011 04:01:23 +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 1RU9S7-0004P7-4u for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 23:01:23 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RU9S5-0004P1-4v for 10135@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 23:01:21 -0500 Original-Received: from [12.206.98.253] (port=22327 helo=ceviche.home) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RU9QS-0001AC-NK; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 22:59:40 -0500 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id D3A96660D4; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 22:59:39 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <5A0FD164923A4D9990DBFBA39F44FC52@us.oracle.com> (Drew Adams's message of "Fri, 25 Nov 2011 07:16:09 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.91 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 23:02:02 -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:54329 Archived-At: > 5. C-x 5 2 [...] > In step 5, a special-display frame should also be used, for the same > reason, but it is not. I could agree that it's a problem, but IIUC this is not a new issue, since I think that's how C-x 5 2 has always worked, right? Stefan