From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Info navigation is broken Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 07:45:51 +0300 (IDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87it4xmgb2.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1023338912 31892 127.0.0.1 (6 Jun 2002 04:48:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 04:48:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17FpCK-0008IH-00 for ; Thu, 06 Jun 2002 06:48:32 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17FpX4-0001JS-00 for ; Thu, 06 Jun 2002 07:09:58 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17FpBt-0003z4-00; Thu, 06 Jun 2002 00:48:05 -0400 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17FpBZ-0003ym-00; Thu, 06 Jun 2002 00:47:45 -0400 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA15175; Thu, 6 Jun 2002 07:45:51 +0300 (IDT) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Miles Bader In-Reply-To: <87it4xmgb2.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:4604 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:4604 On 6 Jun 2002, Miles Bader wrote: > "Eli Zaretskii" writes: > > > Can we scroll the buffer so that the first line (the one that duplicates > > > the content of the header-line) is initially not displayed ? > > > > I'd second that. > > ... or just make the feature optional. Even better. (I think I already suggested that in the past.)