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: Consistent face for keys in *Help* and `substitute-command-keys' Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 08:25:40 -0500 Message-ID: References: <83a6rhxwah.fsf@gnu.org> <837dmlxspt.fsf@gnu.org> <834khpxr0s.fsf@gnu.org> <8335x8ybw9.fsf@gnu.org> <87czwageno.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <878s6xwngp.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <874khjq6p8.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <875z1ylrdw.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83eegmok4v.fsf@gnu.org> <83zgzamcky.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="19135"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: larsi@gnus.org, juri@linkov.net, stefan@marxist.se, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 11 14:27:10 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 1lKLLK-0004rm-36 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 14:27:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50106 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lKLLJ-0005Qc-2W for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 08:27:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40076) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lKLK0-0004Xs-23 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 08:25:48 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:8774) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lKLJy-0003wp-0i; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 08:25:47 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D554210023D; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 08:25:43 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8DE4E1000CF; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 08:25:42 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1615469142; bh=pim1jLboTxTpPp8aa4PhfcDXewIlBvfUt73b7oTvEew=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=IYGIVKqkG6lWwWS06kZYv0URqEF5l+ZX9TP0DjTVXTfspofaXASesAAL36IS0/A21 E8cIDxHlL6LuCgx5OYVw75UzPo2saRKzL6rXGoswRqF6X7XB6alqC1JV385CvqCpsX Mbdmk1YbqRnbpXt6xNzJqLpCOc4Xo1ONPxC2W/VuL/nMoM0d7Nxi4NVx88FGd8zG+A 16PQSk3kJNEa49TpUoV7peWSnBwtQKrcDyLS4u8d3LSN6vkyY1detJcHn857wmLfB8 w0yxBlvcPe0LXCaAZAt/2idvytyd1WoDn2ly6RF45qU+jTc4ztg/u2b/eugJu9kwnq 1cnA/OMRi/97Q== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.43.249]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 13033120319; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 08:25:42 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <83zgzamcky.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 11 Mar 2021 08:25:17 +0200") 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:266325 Archived-At: >> > Is there anything we could do to avoid this if we use :box? Is it >> > annoying enough to avoid :box completely? >> For the modeline, the solution was to use a negative width for the box. > ^^^^^ > You meant "height", right? I think I actually meant "thickness" (regardless of orientation), but yes, the issue is clearly with the vertical size rather than the horizontal one, sorry. Stefan