From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: GUI vs TTY when saving & restoring framesets Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 05:36:37 +0200 Message-ID: <83d1fe4fcq.fsf@gnu.org> References: <834m0r5aiu.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1485142637 28227 195.159.176.226 (23 Jan 2017 03:37:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 03:37:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 23 04:36:52 2017 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 1cVVR3-0006Bc-5v for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 04:36:49 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38982 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cVVR8-0002gg-45 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:36:54 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58310) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cVVQx-0002fB-I1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:36:44 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cVVQu-0005iq-EH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:36:43 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:48262) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cVVQu-0005ik-BF; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:36:40 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4298 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cVVQr-0008Of-Nb; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:36:39 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Juanma Barranquero on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:15:14 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:211572 Archived-At: > From: Juanma Barranquero > Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:15:14 +0100 > Cc: Emacs developers > > > Given user feedback we > > have, I think we should not create GUI frames when Emacs is invoked > > with -nw, though, at least by default. > > I don't understand this. Creating GUI frames in a -nw session shouldn't happen. "Mimicking" the GUI frames in > the -nw session is what the code intended to do, so if you have three frames of whatever size and other > parameters, the TTY session would start with three tty frames (F1 to F3). Then going back to GUI mode would > restore the original GUI frames (not the tty ones). That's fine with me, but if you read bug#17693, you will see that the original report there explicitly describes a situation where GUI frames were created by restoring desktop in a -nw session. I thought this was a feature, but if you say it's a bug, fixing it will fulfill user expectations. > > . emacs > > . emacs -nw > > . emacs > > That is exactly what worked before (or, at least, it worked in all my tests) and it's broken now. Because the original code had worse problems, and we didn't know how to fix it better than that.