From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Stop frames stealing eachothers' minibuffers! Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:00:44 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83mtuze31r.fsf@gnu.org> <838s6jdthq.fsf@gnu.org> <83im5mcd7i.fsf@gnu.org> <87h7l6t2gg.fsf@miha-pc> <83mtuwbxlh.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="4239"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , jakanakaevangeli@chiru.no, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 21 16:02:28 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1lNzb2-000119-Et for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 16:02:28 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55100 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNzb1-00045e-Ff for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:02:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35854) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNzZU-0003Mt-Hc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:00:52 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:59367) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNzZR-0007Zg-Jw; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:00:51 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 937181000F4; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:00:47 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 21695100019; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:00:46 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1616338846; bh=jUrG6GF2HzPUfxtbVuYv4XlN2bsfUFRxEUg3m0eO9bc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=E3MBtoYoZ0WYav3/iT7OW3qJP4XX6xDB58PT0g93HSdMxeMtO4ka1ViKiGr6r2hAc ykHznRSeI8paoTbV4DkACrme+1bIfB/EXFc3WW85QkRqUXU5ZvbBB/Ha4ieKjS6BZl CfgJTuPXYkoskop4m0o5fQ7GieexU58fBKAC1mzvjEb3XebQUlw1xmm0lHTwtr4f5s r1tJtuv4sEzNMBAyE5OPiMEf5AghaP7r69gf9fZxfdpqgh4RXmqzR5yifjmyk/FFI5 XhESTBlg6p97ytrCxhpD1EbSSdoaZLbbIe5JCNx1a5t9YqVA1j04qz2wKrJfbHNnUb /u/BeZIlHOmiA== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.43.249]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CB7961204DC; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:00:45 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Alan Mackenzie's message of "Sun, 21 Mar 2021 14:49:56 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:266708 Archived-At: > The problem I'm trying to solve here is to understand what happens when > emacsclient opens a frame on a different terminal from where emacs > --daemon was started, when there are active minibuffers on the original > terminal. What would be nice would be for these minibuffers to be moved > onto the new frame (when minibuffer-follows-selected-frame is t) or left > on the other non-initial frame (otherwise). Leaving them on the other non-initial frame is OK if the new frame is on the same display. If it is on another display it can be a problem because that other display may be inaccessible to the user at that moment. That's why I added `server-goto-toplevel`. > It appears, from Miha's observation yesterday, that any active > minibuffers would get aborted in this case, to prevent the old frame > blocking the new one. Of course, if you could move the active minibuffers to the new frame (when minibuffer-follows-selected-frame is t), then we could change `server-goto-toplevel` so as not to abort them. > It may well be that further work in this area isn't worthwhile - just how > often is somebody going to create a frame in a different terminal whilst > a minibuffer is active, anyway? I implemented `server-goto-toplevel` because it happened to me quite a few times ;-) Stefan