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: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 09:59:20 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83sg4sbs6w.fsf@gnu.org> <694e12db-a19c-31f8-077c-62d32b640eb9@gmx.at> <83o8fgfgjn.fsf@gnu.org> <83mtuze31r.fsf@gnu.org> <838s6jdthq.fsf@gnu.org> <83im5mcd7i.fsf@gnu.org> <87h7l6t2gg.fsf@miha-pc> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31685"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Alan Mackenzie , Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Miha =?utf-8?B?UmlodGFyxaFpxI0=?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 20 15:00:05 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 1lNc97-0008BK-EZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 15:00:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33350 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNc96-0005ei-CL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 10:00:04 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34676) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNc8U-0005Dc-Vn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 09:59:26 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:7433) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lNc8T-0007aa-1j; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 09:59:26 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5214E8022C; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 09:59:23 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E981C80A9C; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 09:59:21 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1616248761; bh=HhDZ/SkOejvYo3FSsYN5ygIVWdqygB9V/20NhM6/sdw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=UUJKfF163ll0+ZNcVnbdup3Q5ROgbW/BO49H46MPrPUt1yMFFOMOAYnPiVfgfjFTG Vnw925t1PPfpvnD5YmQAcrOARSGawGUnh/oIKRf/OHU7dtrdhdxUAzVxEFswgB/nUc 16gp6sZPDDx0wjTQuPy4ZuszUGR6yeR0cjG6hMq4a2gaDTXHGrrCC0f7OV9nh9QFQ1 ylYK6z+KGbFhxQQ4mgx5XGEXforeIcVvpw0DbgxxJmYXOmFCrUdC7geVqt7gbmBTav XJ/56T1hblF8EJR05ISn74uGC9nV2zFJqjTdycU2xEpkENtKozoKgRJy0WQLFK180v gxl3AVSnOZLbw== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.43.249]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 92735120317; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 09:59:21 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87h7l6t2gg.fsf@miha-pc> ("Miha =?utf-8?B?UmlodGFyxaFpxI0i?= =?utf-8?B?J3M=?= message of "Sat, 20 Mar 2021 13:49:19 +0100") 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:266650 Archived-At: > Just giving a heads up that trouble may arise when moving a minibuffer > from one terminal to another (from tty to X for example). Actually that comment from server.el is not about the difficulty of moving minibuffers but about the problem caused by the lack of minibuffer movement: if a minibuffer is active in terminal 1, then Emacs is in a special mode where input from other terminals is ignored, so an emacsclient opening a frame on a new terminal will display a "dead" frame (in the sense that it doesn't respond to user input until the minibuffer in terminal 1 is exited). Alan's recent changes could actually be used to improve that behavior of server.el by moving the active minibuffer(s) to the new frame instead of aborting those minibuffers. Stefan