From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Koppelman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: pop-to-buffer and friends new behavior or bug? Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:17:35 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87zklhhcys.fsf@gmail.com> <4DFDF945.3040204@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1308597488 12804 80.91.229.12 (20 Jun 2011 19:18:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:18:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Thierry Volpiatto To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 20 21:18:04 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1QYjz1-0001at-Kh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 21:18:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38806 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QYjz0-0001zh-Jr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:18:02 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:33485) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QYjye-0001xN-Gp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:17:41 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QYjyc-0002Ex-MH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:17:40 -0400 Original-Received: from ecelsrv1.ece.lsu.edu ([130.39.16.10]:34329) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QYjyc-0002Eh-Cw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:17:38 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by ecelsrv1.ece.lsu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D688228091; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:17:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ece.lsu.edu Original-Received: from ecelsrv1.ece.lsu.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ecelsrv1.ece.lsu.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VOtXvEu9u78z; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:17:35 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from sky.ece.lsu.edu (sky.ece.lsu.edu [130.39.222.98]) by ecelsrv1.ece.lsu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 673CC28043; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:17:35 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: <4DFDF945.3040204@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Sun, 19 Jun 2011 15:27:33 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-Received-From: 130.39.16.10 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:140734 Archived-At: > Are you sure this happens? I looked into this and it seems to me that > deleting a frame created via C-x 5 2 could not be deleted by deleting > the "last buffer". I usually open a new frame with C-x 5 b or C-x 5 f, so maybe that's the problem. I'll set the new frame-auto-delete to nil, but maybe it would be a good idea to not have the kill buffer commands also kill frames, except under very limited circumstances. Thanks for adding the option, setting it to nil works. martin rudalics writes: >> On a similar note, I find annoying the new behavior of deleting a frame >> when its last buffer (whatever that means) is deleted, at least for >> frames which I explicitly open. > > Are you sure this happens? I looked into this and it seems to me that > deleting a frame created via C-x 5 2 could not be deleted by deleting > the "last buffer". > >> Is that intended? Perhaps there should >> be some kind of option for this (more convenient than advicing >> window-deletable-p). > > I have now installed an option called `frame-auto-delete'. Please try > whether it helps you to get rid of the advice. (If you set this to t > then you can now even delete frames created via C-x 5 2 ;-) ) > > martin