From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#20619: Another HiDPI issue Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 14:55:04 +0200 Message-ID: <573DB7A8.5060805@gmx.at> References: <555CD05C.4070303@stsci.edu> <573982D6.1070706@gmx.at> <573C1321.80809@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1463662586 27103 80.91.229.3 (19 May 2016 12:56:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 12:56:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 20619@debbugs.gnu.org To: cscott@cscott.net Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu May 19 14:56:15 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1b3NUq-0003XF-JD for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 May 2016 14:56:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50266 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b3NUp-0007Bj-NP for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 May 2016 08:56:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59649) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b3NUk-0007BP-98 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 19 May 2016 08:56:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b3NUg-0003sP-3f for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 19 May 2016 08:56:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:45359) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b3NUf-0003sL-W8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 19 May 2016 08:56:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1b3NUf-0006F0-Lt for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 19 May 2016 08:56:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 12:56:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 20619 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 20619-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B20619.146366253023941 (code B ref 20619); Thu, 19 May 2016 12:56:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 20619) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 May 2016 12:55:30 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57696 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1b3NUA-0006E5-I2 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 19 May 2016 08:55:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]:53803) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1b3NU9-0006Dt-J7 for 20619@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 19 May 2016 08:55:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([212.95.7.103]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MTCDO-1bBegu0YK6-00S9yr; Thu, 19 May 2016 14:55:22 +0200 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:1Hekrrp+n66ReJmHOKfgMKX1UI8X9tHFa2r3gzcDvp5iPUp8vQm TrBkZleZ4kiMQr6HDcHotzglwcXZ8cQ7uAY81W67L09JvzCJgtHhsSNJ+JwnbofZXyih2bz gtqB7VSpKgOBoaH5ExVneSzXvNvDLUnFN8uMjjKE1tPrW8ebRsvyBIzATJ+53JGCxLT/Ne6 53B3F7x18KofJznum+bZg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:m/dFgxp6uPY=:S7NkBTVCjFmMbb4QVZr5qx S9wAnr0x8j80HyM+ntoOo//IqAy7oFbaj+0PKhyav+igklYXXS3gYE5riShM8N9iagrrfyMxf RvoMGaEboklmfoIEO+7M7traRp0JE5df7VCa+Ex/fdl+YvpTjtZskwURISj2zvy9k/m6wiNHF g2aVXB2EoAN4ZUooM8go0+nAWkA2+f3LVbl81zn3ZcaI4MbiQ7CTTR+qGjSt0buN3Sf2tYANW HracPqHNDLfCd9a+7wZYDqL4mDBuXk5ncGXmr2mMfNX1GFZczIrJBEvFuGhig6/er5WwrkTzz P89BcgxvB3NxMeyCrdfBggstXmefAroOveNjO64pgObgJe48RGSKGL/Ae2PKVPpHMSz+chVYP gVOhn84ppnXVMdHgRPJSMUSjeFryqSAZ3sfHMw2Bgm72KC2wCLccg4IECfHTZDKzsvJV0wR2/ L3HH4cRh5Hb5BFOEriOIGTqOR6icpBs1cMgPPCOhyxL3Llhf1tCnCvEuTTY2dx5Kq075TbRSD PBZaio44H2M/FTlJiSyNqajBmp8Owz7X/zAwswQ2NGJpGftRTqd/51yHbgp/NexC7Nj8VVTsW JOzshYuEDb96nvN9bj1Xd4yprUWymYpgKhgXdXDW26IfO9bSIB6TIK97GALmJrcU4EuigDWP3 H05qxgxWK6p+j5AgIuKTgqJMA0vpLWgSkyePuUgZ7K5+h+wUCswRrRnsdPOS5TA6Ni5HGoP5h OtnrIcvFe1djhunJsafhGuwkaTsGgBnlyICptA1k6RsqSID5aWAY5gInIhDPnT8bhd9JNg+t X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:118448 Archived-At: > It's not like it's hard to reproduce: download gnome-tweak-tool and set > your scaling factor to 2. It doesn't require any special hardware. ISTR that Glenn already proposed something similar. But I don't use GNOME. I use xfce and spent an entire afternoon to make xfce accept the resolution of my display. The only things I remember about that is that there's hardly anything useful to be found about this issue on the Web and that I had to resort to some non-standard means to have my settings restored in subsequent sessions. I'm simply too afraid to break these settings by simulating a fictitious high resolution display. > What would be *more* useful, instead of guilt-tripping contributors, is to > offer some technical advice on the issue: where my program is likely to be > fine, what part of the code I might consider reading, and useful insight at > all. Then you might motivate me to scratch my own itch and *gain* a > contributor. Instead you are in the process of losing two. Offering technical advice on this issue is not easy for me. In the first place I've so far not been able to understand what the HiDPI scaling issue is all about. I presume that font scaling is left to the application which means for Emacs that users who have set their HiDPI scaling factor to two usually will select a default font twice the usual size. Icon scaling is presumably also left to the application which probabaly means that the Emacs tool bar on a HiDPI scaled display looks very tiny. Are these assumptions correct? If so, scaling probably affects only the sizes and position of windows including subwindows and widgets for menus, scrollbars and tooltips needed to make the appearance of Emacs frames coherent. I said "probably" because the bug descriptions I've red so far do not allow me to draw a precise conclusion. Maybe we should resolve that issue first (see also my questions to Ryan in the thread of bug#20619): Which behaviors are reproducible under which desktop environments, toolkits etc. Now in the thread on bug#20619 Jan said that This is a huge undertaking, that requires changes in Emacs all over the place. Coordinates and sizes are used in many places. But IIUC we do have to identify and change only those places where Emacs passes/receives coordinates to/from the operating system, window manager, or toolkit. Internally, Emacs will proceed to think in its own coordinates. And apparently we have to do that only for the gtk build. Do these assumptions make sense? Now IIUC again Ryan has already provided a solution for the positioning of popup menus and tooltips. IMO we would have to first check whether his approach to use xg_scale_x_y_with_widget is correct and popup menus and tooltips are placed correctly wrt a (probably only fictitiously) correctly positioned frame. If so we can see whether that function can be used for the remaining elements as well. WDYT? martin