From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 8aef5d224a6: Merge branch 'scratch/tty-child-frames' Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 14:46:48 +0200 Message-ID: <868qsblu13.fsf@gnu.org> References: <173459970775.288909.12887171645975658795@vcs3.savannah.gnu.org> <20241219091511.B84DEC022CC@vcs3.savannah.gnu.org> <87ikrflx8s.fsf@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="16971"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: michael.albinus@gmx.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gerd =?utf-8?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 19 13:50:13 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1tOFym-0004Ep-T6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 19 Dec 2024 13:50:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tOFyS-0004Ow-26; Thu, 19 Dec 2024 07:49:53 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tOFw4-0003n0-DN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Dec 2024 07:47:30 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tOFw3-0006vS-Ba; Thu, 19 Dec 2024 07:47:24 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=iC5mMkqApbvzXVmJW1JxWcNKaG7JkMPKHJv7aVZ7MCY=; b=NKXzF6rsFE5vZY9albIo ninxzEi2nAk3/oscaMV7SBjHA+6ReZzt5FQ96gw7AQHc7QcaYaETs+MwRTS/B2fr23nsg19SKVzY4 xsAgS1yF6zSURohCAh8lAusNv4FuiIOofS7j1TMWuYp7sFA+4dHNM4XUO3MGYLk19dQrQGLvENqW9 5ruM1u20PNHhq5hLFyMAzSvB0sGp19xJN//8M2DVNcxj3biFKXbo2vMOEutFySW9cT1IwL7f3PLv9 hqRrLFq3UPqQ2oyBMPgJ/JJv8XqEiIFjLWozTwqVN1EGPRNa88fJyMsefvXPitVXIGwYx9x6tTiME 8hQxqqjFbnoqtw==; In-Reply-To: (message from Gerd =?utf-8?Q?M?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=B6llmann?= on Thu, 19 Dec 2024 12:59:44 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:326738 Archived-At: > From: Gerd Möllmann > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 12:59:44 +0100 > > Michael Albinus writes: > > > Gerd Moellmann writes: > > > > Hi Gerd, > > > >> Merge branch 'scratch/tty-child-frames' > >> > >> Add support for child frames on tty > > > > This breaks xt-mouse-tests: > > > > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > > # make -C test xt-mouse-tests > > Test xt-mouse-tracking-basic condition: > > (error "tty frame should be used") > > FAILED 1/3 xt-mouse-tracking-basic (0.776520 sec) at lisp/xt-mouse-tests.el:61 > > Test xt-mouse-tracking-sgr condition: > > (error "tty frame should be used") > > FAILED 2/3 xt-mouse-tracking-sgr (0.000466 sec) at lisp/xt-mouse-tests.el:102 > > Test xt-mouse-tracking-utf-8 condition: > > (error "tty frame should be used") > > FAILED 3/3 xt-mouse-tracking-utf-8 (0.000746 sec) at lisp/xt-mouse-tests.el:80 > > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > > > > Best regards, Michael. > > Hi Michael, > > The new code now _requires_ a tty frame to be used (decode_tty_frame, > check_tty), which I think the tests can't provide, running in batch. And > I'd rather not be less picky for the sake of these tests. Why is that a problem? A batch session does have a frame, you just need to account for that. I think the test that emits the error is too strict, and should be relaxed when noninteractive is non-zero. Or maybe invert the test and check for !FRAME_WINDOW_P (which would then allow the frame that exists in the batch session).