From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#25943: 21.5 Frame Display Difficulties Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2017 11:00:08 +0200 Message-ID: <58E8A698.1060707@gmx.at> References: "<0b9853e8ecbdb18bb1b8c05347371a7e@127.0.0.1>" <58B925A4.4060406@gmx.at> "" <58BA900B.6040708@gmx.at> "<49adf8e1615512ac19189d75b5e04315@127.0.0.1>" <58BE8138.1040607@gmx.at> "<142b4d1d519a6bf87a5fe320d9eeb419@127.0.0.1>" <58C118CA.8020908@gmx.at> <2395d7c6fbe7358c894bc1406ffcbf45@127.0.0.1> <58C3CF94.3080604@gmx.at> <58D38075.2030409@gmx.at> <58DB63ED.8060305@gmx.at> <58DCB3DB.4050804@gmx.at> <18cc26f5bea50ebd503834074ebaa599@127.0.0.1> <58DF5892.3080001@gmx.at> <7ee8200b866d8067514fb8b0bb9e814b@127.0.0.1> <58E0AE5F.3070705@gmx.at> <58E34A7B.70103@gmx.at> <0312c9ae04719540d13a40236ab9f682@127.0.0.1> <58E72A0C.6090104@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1491642081 5956 195.159.176.226 (8 Apr 2017 09:01:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2017 09:01:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "25943@debbugs.gnu.org" <25943@debbugs.gnu.org> To: david@ngdr.net Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 08 11:01:15 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cwmF0-0008HP-FH for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 11:01:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53981 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cwmF6-0000kn-6Y for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 05:01:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37146) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cwmEz-0000jv-OQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 05:01:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cwmEw-0000Xv-Mq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 05:01:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:38870) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cwmEw-0000Xr-Ic for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 05:01:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cwmEw-0006pO-8t for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 05:01:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2017 09:01:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 25943 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 25943-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B25943.149164202626193 (code B ref 25943); Sat, 08 Apr 2017 09:01:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 25943) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Apr 2017 09:00:26 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37069 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cwmEM-0006oP-2c for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 05:00:26 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:64996) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cwmEK-0006o7-8G for 25943@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 05:00:24 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([213.162.68.40]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LvV1X-1bxtwz0l0d-010az2; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 11:00:14 +0200 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:5yElip9ITm6ikQGDK1VOXUi/IxiOkmX9R1Mk+fkJIezuw1z21de 0mxMt4ZTdY9Hv6pxxfAB0xy32tebL0GvVtEDYnET2lPEebpvXIh1eJLEwZmPkO+6mM/mGbd YX+istGiOjHgRKz7zWlkp5xnDJzcIa9wT2NCeIqCuS00XdMkKOqva0JJlPPLpPRQbufNnIh H1nVEuXZM62xQredrKeiw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:K1C058mgGuU=:7MwKgojPqGsdE6G5/BmWcM 4YztLkd9MDYf1qfUE7DFuY+8RM1WjpJpjh517A5WGYWtbF1gevzxjGR6HCh6qQr6o8PCcsvia 6dI5Pji2hWD1DCheIhuuesruaswhnqbz8ODqk4z+JBnedlLusASJxoJQ0/HoDbus+1ZUVox8P EI4ohFX0GCv2s+QJ16/q3lMotfqNv5d5bACRwmvJqxWj9Ce/vkhTwURINjup0TDa9BPkNuDr3 WGEtwpV++95IexZsADZxBKVFc9Y1zOo117ZioFouVHUgsR310hnCFpZ4iz05rNLsHXzAz6myB 8e/UQbOpzUQlj+28NE7JzAyXWfUKovUQPKLWzAHS1y3i7MpQRe5Bt2RMl09FDVRnkI3Mr5d00 2/G+gU9JWu5lQJ/ZQz5jLIbtxga+U/EFAmldlJHFFGY4IgdQZiSeYJ/XzRmyuNchGl2LM2AMQ xqjjACCWrLYz1ZpiTYy3ugI3eYAixX8BLiotxlBaTCgzoGkrVkNilypmlpBR50jXIV/HwquPM GgHza0voWoCYOAPHg5H0xMRmFYrFPByVroHwFbnW+valkyn7PKk9SEA4/riTdScLkgE3a2i4l L1YSMcp8s/OQP8F7OdQDZIG3bAQ0pOz7UDR/Uqzovua4P/9YR71XJvQ9J+wTcyDVmieyxUSrN lEMYHTpSXn5XaF74LhfKp04tysVnOYBsvy93ud61g5R8xfjX65hnnI0FX7ISMx/bgceKLWgi5 IM3qgwks83E6hozBReLQwFKqnXWKhSUehAWQH07rVxVDF/HmLpmhgfP4i0dinpd44Jo5nXuf 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:131355 Archived-At: > The results are somewhat fascinating because of the differences in > performance, which, of course, you cannot see. Sometimes problem 3 is > easy to see, sometimes it takes several frame creations and deletions. > There is one result where running over the network improves performance! > Running over the network is included because the results, and what I see, > make it hard to avoid speculating that timing/race conditions are at the > root of problem 3. If > 25.1 Mneme GTK3 Mneme Yes > 25.1 Thalia No Thalia Yes Yes, but rare. > 26.0.50 Thalia No Thalia Yes > 25.1 Erota No Erota Yes below mean that the network was not involved, then the results below don't seem to confirm that speculation. > Here is some detail. Computer Mneme and Erota run Linux Mint 18.1, > computer Thalia runs Trisquel 7. I run emacs on all three, sometimes over > my small network. > > A "No" entry for problem 3 really means "Not Yet"; but I have tried many > times to generate the problem. > > Sometimes it is possible to see the separation of the emacs frame and the > WM window. There can be a short period before the two coalesce > (flashing), or the two may stay separated. Does "stay separated" mean that the separation continues forever even after showing another buffer in the frame, splitting its root window, demaximizing and again maximizing it? > Version Run Toolkit Display Problem3 > 25.1 Mneme GTK3 Mneme Yes > GTK3 Thalia No This is a surprising result, > given the above; it can be > viewed as a performance > improvement. > Erota Yes Yes, but very rare. > > 25.1 Thalia No Thalia Yes Yes, but rare. > Mneme Yes > 26.0.50 Thalia No Thalia Yes > Mneme Yes This shows both short period > and permanent frame separation. > > 25.1 Erota No Erota Yes > Mneme Yes > 26.0.50 Erota GTK3 Erota No > Mneme No The last two lines seem to indicate that running a GTK3 build of 26.0.50.0 on Erota gives the best results. Did you try 26.0.50.0 GTK3 builds for your Thalia and Mneme machines? martin