From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Is it possible lock minibuffer's height Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2018 08:24:20 +0100 Message-ID: <5A98FC24.6020602@gmx.at> References: <672f4d41.3276.161e4903f08.Coremail.tumashu@163.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 1519975387 2422 195.159.176.226 (2 Mar 2018 07:23:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2018 07:23:07 +0000 (UTC) To: tumashu , "emacs-devel@gnu.org" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 02 08:23:02 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1erf1y-000060-KO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Mar 2018 08:23:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33103 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1erf41-0001BL-72 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Mar 2018 02:25:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53674) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1erf3R-0001BA-BF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Mar 2018 02:24:34 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1erf3M-0004GZ-Dt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Mar 2018 02:24:33 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]:44795) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1erf3M-0004G0-3N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Mar 2018 02:24:28 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([212.95.5.91]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lqm3a-1eESgh3o3e-00eHfz; Fri, 02 Mar 2018 08:24:22 +0100 In-Reply-To: <672f4d41.3276.161e4903f08.Coremail.tumashu@163.com> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:UBuecNYFHujWWrpZZj0Vh34+24KFpgVT1fppMce3IIHP28xdYH4 vyD5/SHs6bCXdMkzhTiGTJCKrsjoLYUAR5l4hli+3IzjicwF1Y/kc5jdMUyB+RZrnuOfbsl U2XUaCkbPvivbRyP1qxNDQQ0cTJXZPA8de/3irjPBo7wDl066UjMQlZ5mbgfsta43nsPfXv qg7g/UYTHuIlx4b/wxOTw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:tZdNhIRLNa8=:OhvEgl0ryxMNiOs4YuXcSK sIFs821Te+xL4sN1ehtndGqwy79/mSalP8XLakmUCHRGpH8j1sAEiSNlJc4dOYTh4+qdgiaJJ AkBpBX9FTYvKqY4crUzCgYV7pavaRQgdp8Jd1Y2oRv94RdUwXqDcax1+cg20ylU+KwOZwHQen KBQvPDt+qewZsbDh5/xJILjgfE0yWXg1kMlVLADyUOjd00VYZnBXOczN2Mc82z9X8SWuYIskE XAZF4MNIDoFmAsfqvdyiA4P8hbYOhtAgb7QjgmtD1HP8Vb1tykZHoo2ojEfS2NGWmPebsfcnw dSk6y1wz668A6eApb6IYIKu2JQUrnqiU83RCKq2eBEw/9/ZGmDdmTsBZCBXDaWzBOnK8BV9n/ gmGSEXSI5XIG1qzjmLn7EDCyBbZ157lhkZw0IyuKuVoUDve8CdvDTRRxhIADNCDVNm6ay0paK UuaxdNitw+pdfReOQp4fhchF6I/+adYAwVldacGNEZa0/R54/mUv5WDmSRfRUc/rbn61K2Asx fRXIVwTnGua49u7kX1Guy7iZlPs0MuaVkokXLeUyh0f0+N2XP7Q5xQaR7ADqWw7HRVOfzQWcP ALo+SRHIXCFgKYirvfBMIC/p2qz6gbbWW3sjoI8tFKr53keKXRDwQSKjl+n2IUM85MywYctKE /2Sg/HOV531sZFepJQePyrTzZO3/cFal0bIsEIzR+gvaoF6N5YaCqbTK/t+zcNvoJB3zgiu3B BW0PTpqJo7taB+b3pZzhSvhyKOmp2sYaOwozULrjMjR1r912HBQUOEmXkijWl1Xb+UCqiYlK X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 212.227.17.20 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:223213 Archived-At: > I want to show minibuffer's content with posframe and hard lock the minibuffer's height to 1, > any method to do this job? I suppose that would be a frame with a minibuffer and a root window - correct? Currently, we have no way to fix the size of the minibuffer window on such frames but we can easily provide a new frame parameter to do that. But why can't you just use two frames instead - one for the root and another for the minibuffer window? A minibuffer-only frame has fixed size. Even if we will change that in the future, there must be a way to inhibit that it resizes automatically. martin