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#28605: 26.0.60; Part of leftmost character hidden Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 10:57:04 +0200 Message-ID: <59E5C5E0.3070103@gmx.at> References: <87efqikk0x.fsf@gmail.com> <87a815lq3w.fsf@gmail.com> <59D73C6F.3020907@gmx.at> <87o9pk65ae.fsf@gmail.com> <59D74E49.2000605@gmx.at> <87a8145wcr.fsf@gmail.com> <59DCCA92.8090501@gmx.at> <59DDD72B.3040003@gmx.at> <59DF2220.4030705@gmx.at> <87d15sn257.fsf@gmail.com> <59E07FC9.9050907@gmx.at> <87376n4bfb.fsf@gmail.com> <59E0B5BB.6070302@gmx.at> <87bmlb5hif.fsf@gmail.com> <59E1CC8C.9030005@gmx.at> <87mv4urtsp.fsf@gmail.com> <59E1D6FD.5060203@gmx.at> <878tgbs4ke.fsf@gmail.com> 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 1508230699 30074 195.159.176.226 (17 Oct 2017 08:58:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 08:58:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Ola Nilsson , Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen , 28605@debbugs.gnu.org, Kaushal To: Robert Pluim Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 17 10:58:15 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 1e4NhN-0006Jl-Dv for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 10:58:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37269 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e4NhU-0004MX-Dd for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 04:58:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38456) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e4NhO-0004MH-AR for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 04:58:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e4NhK-0000OW-Ff for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 04:58:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:36176) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e4NhK-0000OP-B2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 04:58:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e4NhK-0001ZS-3V for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 04:58:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 08:58:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 28605 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 28605-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B28605.15082306435984 (code B ref 28605); Tue, 17 Oct 2017 08:58:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 28605) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Oct 2017 08:57:23 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44854 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e4Ngg-0001YQ-Kf for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 04:57:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]:60933) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e4Nge-0001YC-S9 for 28605@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 04:57:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([46.125.249.51]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MY7ZA-1diMgb1gWG-00UpGo; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 10:57:13 +0200 In-Reply-To: <878tgbs4ke.fsf@gmail.com> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:p/9yaoeanc38jFoaf6+4cjxnghb7CWewsoFSXKY2BQKY+C46qIk 4rM6v/9gHjTLsKV90DYLJTg0+qm0jnOPVIKrMjIfG/q4cdEeerfB9mVdE53nS7mR4NquG45 rr0qyLhr+VtUOH7vO3K9whbI4Ke2skL/XCkXhETvYmA3z4PrqtNWZVc8ua8hgxhd8FJltaB ssDo0DPEavVp1R27Ln9kg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:S4CylZ7pgis=:Ii+y25YQiXX98BQFKq4MPm LhoOiN1nGYq6tYZ1X/hOBtA1eNBl6FTUv7YM10Qo8txS28RWknYFCAiJ+Kk1wIvhIc/4Y5PEc lg8hdyYK5FQaFt13/A9YAncDhjkpFl9HUyNBExYP6z4o7D2Pnbb+5a5UtjOEb/2kuSwbsMkz2 VsG6xL2TVT1U9SIftBvnevoDUZbIAtFBWZca5jSac6UuSCJLqYeLRRQog5WlzRbMHz7nqHhSL 2zVilvUT3yN26cuuS4XdQq5Yuhbgn4vJdHSRSPHN5zVixhBBa/5K+ixD3fp1OgD75vRlVt9gJ apoPOkg1KshA9wFyIQCVS3zCiSiLgEbCMVOkFxDdO4T4cutixO3R2hsvokbq4G2SALVO6VPmD Ske4Zy2PgBzBrW8zIGzl/31wC+kmGwRUPeNpn7EYcb2i8pASRmAQnypthl4Gn6IAeWLBNAujy N7IqEoHBdljGFnm00nFxoV/+nwcqNdFpCW/rvq2chsQ165yrMCUXAzppsgwzUvW1hv18N4BRk Dn9R/6rwbCyMBYrDLOQKAgTvYG96dn1ED3g/b/3UgsgOGK6Rl1PiMd5ZFr7g/92EJoMkBwm7N pmIuilJMaKdTGK4WapYl1kKmIxTeC8r+XqtxqdkzQEV2x7ttCohrCQzA4vGfnd1TYKGMotAp/ g1MrnnOTmxTf8GuZDuABZ+vPna9JvN1beYwuULHNjRfXXdXak0eCFSKlMIT9maJvRCdQr7YeL NcpQxfAmRH4Nfp3ZDLYHmlnaUJ19ALuSfuaDJb+PuUvxo631DbRLqKRfjBtBMkNcuGykglF+ 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:138594 Archived-At: > (75 [...] Thanks. This adds yet another facet to that completely irrational behavior with scaling. The earlier trace you posted had this for the first scroll bar removal (# adjust-frame-size-1 (1494 1100 1494 1100) (set-window-configuration 1)) [...] (# xg-frame-resized (1476 1100 1494 1100) nil) [...] (# xg-frame-resized (1458 1100 1476 1100) nil) [...] (# adjust-frame-size-1 (1458 1100 1458 1100) (vertical-scroll-bars 3))) so the width went up from 1458 to 1476 and then to 1494 while the height remained at 1100. Now you have (# adjust-frame-size-3 (1458 1100 1494 998) (1500 1100 1510 998)) [...] (# xg-frame-resized (1458 1100 1494 998) nil) [...] (# adjust-frame-size-1 (1458 1100 1458 1100) (vertical-scroll-bars 3))) so the width went up (albeit in one step only) to 1494 again but at the same time the height went down from 1100 to 998. Would inhibiting double buffering change anything? I'm still not sure about that "Force scroll bars to be real X11 windows" change. In the worst case we would have to test with some irrational build which OT1H excludes 2016-10-28 Daniel Colascione Add double-buffering support to reduce flicker and OTOH includes your and Lars' changes to scaling. martin PS: I'm afraid there are no news on the paperwork front. Right?