From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Copley Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#24500: 25.1.50; Can't other-window from minibuffer if Ediff control panel frame present Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 20:35:38 +0100 Message-ID: References: <83a8f1f8l0.fsf@gnu.org> <83mvj0dkhd.fsf@gnu.org> <57E6CE51.1040600@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1475523445 11950 195.159.176.226 (3 Oct 2016 19:37:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 19:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 24500@debbugs.gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 03 21:37:21 2016 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 1br934-0001lt-Bi for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 21:37:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38906 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1br933-0006St-2U for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 15:37:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50493) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1br92w-0006Rh-L7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 15:37:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1br92s-0002s1-DR for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 15:37:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:37150) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1br92s-0002rs-9t for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 15:37:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1br92s-0006ad-1l for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 15:37:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Richard Copley Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 19:37:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 24500 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 24500-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B24500.147552337625238 (code B ref 24500); Mon, 03 Oct 2016 19:37:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 24500) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Oct 2016 19:36:16 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43340 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1br928-0006Z0-0F for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 15:36:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ua0-f173.google.com ([209.85.217.173]:36679) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1br926-0006Yk-0t for 24500@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 15:36:14 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ua0-f173.google.com with SMTP id n13so159723510uaa.3 for <24500@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 12:36:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cjg+M6HwOVOXaW4ZUpMirn7kxciYVDV+ZTgTlr/K+ww=; b=Eiti1iayL2dDWN4pqjikRsJu7VEjO6u1wn4XhCiA3HgIv3rz2c3aElaxH/8reigWSo K7m3AolIBSYoByPY06bkazVCfqVPPdPvpSHQAtnJsrkyfpUpZ6HeXSDeCncXt1O4UhKY eAa/mxfqv9y6XMIYswxDZHpgflSJ+n6zQpgQlH8c9fB0FOOA5iYs1FNl6VtPcwRIYPIj u7km35mcDyTAZisRFQ+zEKJHW9+XHnm8Zh2pN1Sdk7Hs9ovNqcdl7amlbx7n2tal1At4 Arqb/rtTlpGySXYhG7woZad7rhrgLCHXMjgk2CXN84094zSTFWdkrwsspHLge2rkrs03 35mQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cjg+M6HwOVOXaW4ZUpMirn7kxciYVDV+ZTgTlr/K+ww=; b=FDsDXTd18fPutQr/S7mCqing7ms/qpJz7bv3NheGZmvNNJKtB7T+2yo7iam2HOLVOT e5N3zYd0iDuPh/n8/GNOe+/+tUulcUKM5Ah7wgmJOAKys7LjO7zOH4KkJeh2CwIAqo1Q tG11UJYK3haufaHXYoW9pKPHUtHAkbNHUbJyBWwazUx0udL43fh3NyJM6yTqCr7HoNr6 Oc58AdPsewwq8MwkEhoZCDFJBZFR4+jilOpu+zUGF79C5Vx95LB2GbRGqYk4wEnn6irz SHFuo4kHTW2jQqhR5227Pyjx/RBQGlqeqALD+bdILW/rlPIozlboNxHIJOlLpARW/l8n PwXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RmAbeMSzVI+Mb42K5AHzoGeYDwidjZeMFHd6URe68kHkUNoeiIVEg8y1XuMzIJMv7iQoIPV80PxAiXF5g== X-Received: by 10.159.32.101 with SMTP id 92mr12547785uam.123.1475523368553; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 12:36:08 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.159.40.1 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 12:35:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: 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:123981 Archived-At: On 29 September 2016 at 00:21, Richard Copley wrote: > On 24 September 2016 at 20:04, martin rudalics wrote: >> I attached two patches that seem to work, but without any warranty (I do >> not fully understand the intentions of frame-focus/focus_frame and >> x_get_focus_frame yet). The purpose of these patches is to keep the >> =E2=80=98next-window=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98other-window=E2=80=99 mechani= sms symmetric whenever a frame >> shares its minibuffer with other frames: >> >> (1) The frame.c patch changes the behavior of =E2=80=98do_switch_frame= =E2=80=99 by >> redirecting focus to another frame that shares this frame's minibuffer >> even when that other frame has no pending minibuffer activity. >> >> (2) The window.c patch simply inhibits =E2=80=98next-window=E2=80=99 to = select a window >> on a frame that has no pending minibuffer activity. >> >> Please try these patches (only one at a time because the window.c patch >> makes the frame.c patch moot) and tell me whether they have any bad >> effects. >> >> Thanks, martin > > Thank you! > [...] > > I'll try patch (2) later. It sounds logical to me. I've been using the window.c patch for a few days and I haven't noticed any badness.