From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#63967: 28.2; switch-to-buffer in normal window fails if minibuffer window is active Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2023 06:39:41 +0000 Message-ID: <3c82fb01f4aa90537660@heytings.org> References: <83o7lo28e6.fsf@gnu.org> <83cz241rgy.fsf@gnu.org> <835y7v26ys.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="21155"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: al@petrofsky.org, rudalics@gmx.at, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 63967@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 10 08:40:28 2023 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 1q7sGy-0005Mg-0Y for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2023 08:40:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q7sGc-0008IP-FZ; Sat, 10 Jun 2023 02:40:06 -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 1q7sGZ-0008IC-I7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2023 02:40:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q7sGZ-00038G-92 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2023 02:40:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1q7sGY-0006xK-HD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2023 02:40:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Gregory Heytings Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2023 06:40:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 63967 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 63967-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B63967.168637918526704 (code B ref 63967); Sat, 10 Jun 2023 06:40:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 63967) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jun 2023 06:39:45 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33112 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1q7sGH-0006we-9B for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2023 02:39:45 -0400 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:38224) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1q7sGF-0006wU-7c for 63967@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jun 2023 02:39:44 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20220101; t=1686379182; bh=ZRmMJo3NLjMibExaPaOrQUtoENcCNzixQCssgSZ9IzE=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=c5w8N5Pw48lMX8JJAp1lruCwHvMmKIc0Z/ncDe54lSZSqy+5c8ezr5aZyvDI9yMfF ryljk2r2164gP9AaEejGGAwSPN2Lk+RFwZ/vDKkDXKOkMwzk8tKBIiqzvOyx7ADEbM 0U1NIyoyC3UmvprGvl0Hv7R7ivZ5ebT58/7S2nb/pgHOlnohQnyqL+HxUzamYweCeB E05bPPJmbf5T6p8rUHNuzK4QStVl+1HthK4d6/VHB4moQlJfAu603OU++ThFVE9ckZ zRGvzW3uez0Kj2VCwriGkBEyX525lJ06SA17LJFUObawA34tq3qrD/ZzdVBHbrDjMD ZOBX5fvS+41HQ== In-Reply-To: <835y7v26ys.fsf@gnu.org> 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:263194 Archived-At: >>>>> I couldn't find the offending change >>>> >>>> It's 7c2ebf6e23. >>> >>> Thanks. Yes, I imagined it would be it. Which is why I said: it >>> won't help us to know which commit changed that. >> >> Given your last post, apparently it did help ;-) > > Unfortunately, no, because the changeset is huge, and just knowing what > part of it could cause this is a non-trivial job. Fortunately, the code > which clobbers the selected-window was clearly visible in GDB, which is > what led to my previous post. > I see. Apparently we don't work the same way. I didn't have time to investigate this issue further after bisecting, but the first thing I would have done is to determine which of the four calls to Fset_frame_selected_window in that changeset is responsible for that bug.