From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: The unwarranted scrolling assumption Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 19:22:43 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87631jvpzg.fsf@gmail.com> <4C18211C.3070106@harpegolden.net> <87vd9j5neu.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <83sk4misf2.fsf@gnu.org> <83iq5hiiin.fsf@gnu.org> <83fx0lihov.fsf@gnu.org> <838w6cixma.fsf@gnu.org> <83y6ech1oo.fsf@gnu.org> <83ocf8gx7e.fsf@gnu.org> <83fx0jgxk7.fsf@gnu.org> <83eig3gspa.fsf@gnu.org> <83bpb7gp2g.fsf@gnu.org> <837hlvglvh.fsf@gnu.org> <834ogzglaj.fsf@gnu.org> <8339wjgg8w.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1276968194 11263 80.91.229.12 (19 Jun 2010 17:23:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 17:23:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 19 19:23:13 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OQ1lA-0002Fm-E4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 19:23:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39766 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OQ1l9-0007RH-Q4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 13:23:11 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=32987 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OQ1l3-0007P3-CL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 13:23:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OQ1l2-0001rx-Dg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 13:23:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yw0-f192.google.com ([209.85.211.192]:42613) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OQ1l2-0001rq-A5; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 13:23:04 -0400 Original-Received: by ywh30 with SMTP id 30so2055896ywh.24 for ; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 10:23:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=DmMsh8acWvX8EwRDSVzbaSXgK5M4kphNC3Ci1fH3bDs=; b=gMSdVzmWPh0dBt5KaXY20cpDfHNLGk46ZSepnkUDns+yUxowqJIJ/2rG4OgawLM5PD jf03Bjg3WeC588YFNuqlGHQXjbDddEHaHGbPoM/MWo3SSziDQTHwO/Y4aj+Vs4OkAJyY 59r9dVoMswN+3Ghs3J50wA4xrp2TjygznF69U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=fZ6MuQUWVf1qSWeGuCPg5E0IiHBAtTBVpNKbART5bqwOZoQ++Bfh9D88/rOn1vNTV+ bANFWvDRX1tny2xxH7Wa8iaf39W0eQ1KDN8Poi0j9Q3b/JGlJFmpQ2miPFzaFdg89GVA uRS/jj54FyYaL6dr86EQVgtpAbiyRdkvQ0dzQ= Original-Received: by 10.101.4.4 with SMTP id g4mr2186641ani.156.1276968183293; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 10:23:03 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.100.154.15 with HTTP; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 10:22:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8339wjgg8w.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:126234 Archived-At: On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Lennart Borgman >> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 16:20:58 +0200 >> Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org >> >> > Please try this patch after reverting yours, and see if the problem >> > you were trying to solve is gone. >> >> >> I am sure it does not. > > Could you please humor me by trying? I think misread this as if you tried to solve the original problem with this patch. Did you try to solve the original problem or another problem? What exactly what you want me to test?