From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: rameiko87@posteo.net Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#69738: Followup Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2024 17:44:32 +0000 Message-ID: <1ed9ea789788d6a6450c86920199b6c6@posteo.net> References: <4a0215b2e7bb416cf352e867183f745a@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18999"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: 69738@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 13 19:45:15 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1rvhRC-0004kG-4o for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 19:45:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rvhQu-0002hm-Fb; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 13:44:56 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rvhQt-0002hW-0w for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 13:44:55 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rvhQs-0005zS-Or for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 13:44:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rvhR3-0007Ox-5O for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 13:45:05 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <4a0215b2e7bb416cf352e867183f745a@posteo.net> Resent-From: rameiko87@posteo.net Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2024 17:45:04 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69738 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 69738-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B69738.171303029628342 (code B ref 69738); Sat, 13 Apr 2024 17:45:04 +0000 Original-Received: (at 69738) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Apr 2024 17:44:56 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33740 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rvhQt-0007Mr-Ca for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 13:44:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]:34969) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rvhQn-0007L5-Ri for 69738@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 13:44:53 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D67E6240103 for <69738@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 19:44:32 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1713030272; bh=rfXnSsQir3AjrK7uHyT683cJIW9JL8uJwRT4Hgm1FdY=; h=MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Date:From:To: Subject:Message-ID:From; b=H80MIqXk+pdzML8aIrKbk2VG1VxxstjTtjHlphy9IxGvJU5frPU9R2g+ihepzDvDh vC79Ua4m/KESAAlPxsTKXA4TxwK+wEXLV6QZnfUitQENAEn0ciLZfyGUlT6e0pYo8b OMjFcm4YPKnpUfc4+w0wx+8/iFjkKu9mnqGqS2UKEj7dnaJd35bufX6e5aH4FKyLnd yAKkThbghG8rkviC4jBUmRb1qZdpZpqau7oqkf4NZC7qSVGJZKMvGgr1vd985CfVj1 LX5hvHe0+FFg3irCh5epFVHG0wkULf51gVFtoKyieY/BoteMYqytKcpD0Uv7Pj4p5b s+3IRK2/0eqgw== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4VH15r2P1Jz9rxD for <69738@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 19:44:32 +0200 (CEST) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:283227 Archived-At: Hello, I use emacs -nw. I tried but just can't: the current way that rmail-mail-return is implemented makes no sense when rmail-mail-new-frame is true: every time I send an email I'm left with an extra frame displaying the duplicate of a buffer which either is already open on another frame, or which was buried and for some reason now resuscitates. Every time I have to manually delete such frame. It's very reasonable to expect that after creating a new frame just to send an email, then such frame is gotten rid of when the message is send (or aborted or whatever), and we're back to the original frame (as was originally implied by the manual). The fact that it's such a reasonable expectation and that it takes so much inconvenience to delete the extra frame manually every time, makes me think that it should be this way by default, hence the manual was good and the code was to be changed... and I bet that every person which uses -nw with rmail-mail-new-frame will agree with me; is there any good reason to keep it this way, which escapes my analysis?