From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Uhm... weird frame behaviour Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 16:55:08 +0200 Message-ID: <4E6E1D4C.7030601@gmx.at> References: <4E6C80BF.2060002@gmx.at> <4E6DCB0A.4060605@gmx.at> <87mxeaar26.fsf@wanadoo.es> <4E6DFF55.3000708@gmx.at> <87ehzlnaxj.fsf@wanadoo.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1315839320 17033 80.91.229.12 (12 Sep 2011 14:55:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 14:55:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?=D3scar_Fuentes?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 12 16:55:16 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 1R37um-0000Aa-KP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 16:55:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44770 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R37um-0000QI-52 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:55:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:60375) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R37uj-0000Pv-5U for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:55:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R37ui-0007Cg-AO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:55:13 -0400 Original-Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.23]:38131) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R37uh-0007AB-Q6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:55:12 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 12 Sep 2011 14:55:09 -0000 Original-Received: from 62-47-53-77.adsl.highway.telekom.at (EHLO [62.47.53.77]) [62.47.53.77] by mail.gmx.net (mp069) with SMTP; 12 Sep 2011 16:55:09 +0200 X-Authenticated: #14592706 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/8guUFUGv8xpLA4RIKhF3XM5KGMcGkkXf5p+yvq9 u5NZhRTqArE2Qe User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) In-Reply-To: <87ehzlnaxj.fsf@wanadoo.es> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 213.165.64.23 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:143934 Archived-At: >> This would constitute a bug by itself. Does it also happen when you do >> `delete-windows-on' for the only visible buffer? > > Yes, the frame is deleted. > > Setting window-auto-delete to nil or 'window does not help. > > Just tried again with emacs -Q --daemon : same problem. > >> What does `other-visible-frames-p' return when you're on "the only >> frame of your Emacs session"? > > t I don't understand that. Is the daemon frame iconified? If nobody can tell, could you step through other_visible_frames to find out why there are two visible frames? martin