From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs's set-frame-size can not work well with gnome-shell? Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2020 23:50:15 +0300 Message-ID: References: <2056a194.3971.16f8d4dd4c5.Coremail.tumashu@163.com> <437eae9b-ccc1-3875-86b7-1af0e61b6e15@gmx.at> <710da57c-28dc-fab7-81af-0318a9389d6a@yandex.ru> <0e41cd9e-8be3-f67a-6958-7bad38ee1266@gmx.at> <6c86c25b-22df-2b69-34fe-539605f624ba@yandex.ru> <7dd69fe5-4ef4-782c-2fba-031d475f6406@yandex.ru> <32fb4915-be55-f753-5f6c-423a09030fd6@gmx.at> <8b252ea4-5902-d21e-a0d7-cdb3ddbb4e08@yandex.ru> <39d47d8c.4bad.16fcd672191.Coremail.tumashu@163.com> <729d39eb-d0b4-2cc5-cac3-e129a3effa87@yandex.ru> <06c6b6fb-ce6f-456b-6a22-c5a26a0ab297@gmx.at> <50912835-37d2-f15b-8fd1-b6619893d1ce@yandex.ru> <4a424bf3-ee08-b114-73ef-287bde14003b@gmx.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="10572"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 Cc: "emacs-devel@gnu.org" To: martin rudalics , tumashu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 26 21:50:53 2020 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 1ivors-0002iU-Oz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 21:50:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36872 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ivorr-0000va-Tz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 15:50:51 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43770) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ivorN-0000TD-G2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 15:50:22 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ivorM-0007eN-5z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 15:50:21 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-lj1-x229.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::229]:42907) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ivorL-0007dn-St for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 15:50:20 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-lj1-x229.google.com with SMTP id y4so8575587ljj.9 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 12:50:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4uZLSBDBZ5s4xRZG15Ud6DFSRIhsy+4ZDByUjOScioY=; b=LIAboEhl2m97r1TbwDIg7feT5DzDt/3z5Lv1A5cRyMWXblP3UcqARwf3ry1w+OcUWe cjJ1vCXFrK/sKApHPQklNRhThuPWbVscSxPk6RXv9aH5jkMMPlsUGUDw34uZ0Bsy3m5Y u6UUEbhRPth5SbVjCNFll4DvQFoEiLXT9zWvsveByj1H29/QLsVczz1e2fTcPJgBzweA a/VY2UwZbxSSrSJ7rGmFEUm2UVwLprUZscIK2AWSUJ98esnJMPBTqrnqQSSewrHUnx0q xUJ86GchVO2/tFo+X/4ScXWS3IGCr50rsmtzv+02LPHRUI9OCB5gCriBNxISIccH0aLC 972Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=4uZLSBDBZ5s4xRZG15Ud6DFSRIhsy+4ZDByUjOScioY=; b=WWqKj2rw0nccI3r43jM2aQEyVx0MTd4ClUDUl47+Pi2caXuBwjjvnIgLCbTr4vKsa1 ZsQvRtZopJt6c8qLCokaemm89wl20gFPhL/xlQFRGrOKRm10JvKEr1vYJH6pH4eEheGM ZF+S2WuWBXyvyhBp4WMMgIlDckSqp2AryOgl3v7QRWBzjeVbnoedra2IGG732C4xNtVQ vm1I0+IVi/SJrYDQziEjuhAxhcONfKEdPG0EqmUu0q6KF2+QKpb1BjtEmuSmeb8pI9X1 6SvNZxzB/leVNhKSSF4zCGH1xAaCcUVvKLPy4/xrwWKZvVTj2Xx/ENs6LQpEMEDAA4Kx KwtA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVqUSH+7fYN1Tzfidl0X+PDQu8hhvb6tTMCifnsMGW5tKr029bl TYuNEn/lcS6v0MFFyDcdeok6StJYjAH8Hw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw5zyyD3gAmvEvt/A7D6rXvll0SJy3cMY3dyFuJ+GzyvGjxpXmJKuAFk6e8l9gk0xZ+ba2F6A== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:884d:: with SMTP id z13mr8253125ljj.116.1580071817750; Sun, 26 Jan 2020 12:50:17 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.35] (87-100-236-223.bb.dnainternet.fi. [87.100.236.223]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 138sm6899452lfa.76.2020.01.26.12.50.16 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 26 Jan 2020 12:50:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4864:20::229 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:244663 Archived-At: On 26.01.2020 20:38, martin rudalics wrote: > > Changed the scaling factor of the desktop to 100% (everything became > tiny on my monitor), restarted Emacs. > > > >    => dragging by mode-line was smooth > > Don't you have some old laptop somwehere where you could try the > experiments without scaling (I'd never believe that changing scaling > on-the-fly works always in a reproducible fashion). I should see if my old laptop is still functional when I'm near geographically (maybe tomorrow). Speaking of old laptops, my offer regarding help installing GNOME or sending a newer video card still stands. Although I'm guessing, given an old enough system, you might have to change both the MB and CPU as well. > And, it does _not_ work smoothly here.  I can drag the frame smoothly by > a short distance, then it suddenly jumps, then it drags smoothly again > and so on ... I'm guessing you could be more sensitive to GC pauses. My current laptop is almost top-of-the-line. > > BUT dragging the borders to resize had the same problem I reported > previously, so it's likely not HiDPI related. > > Dragging the right and bottom borders too?  Here dragging any border is > usually smooth with very occasional jumps.  But it's much better than > moving. Yes. I described that later in the previous email. > > Then I changed scaling back to 200%, restarted Emacs. > > > >    => dragging by mode-line was still smooth (normal frame). > > That's what I meant with never to change scaling with a running desktop. > Hot-plugging a scale factor is troublesome like changing the resolution > of the display IMHO. Same flakiness of behavior also happened the last time I tried this. And at that time I didn't change the scale factor at all. Simply: at the beginning of the session dragging was smooth, then something happened, and it became choppy. And I deleted/created new frames in the meantime. > > Then tried the child-frame example. > > > >    => dragging was choppy. But it resizes smoothly enough when dragged > > by the bottom or right edges. And, more importantly, resizes > > correctly. When dragged by top-left, it resizes choppily, but still > > correctly. > > > > In the same session, I applied your default-frame-alist change and > > created a second "normal" frame. Dragging it by mode-line was choppy > > again. > > This again hints at something not really reproducible when changing the > scale factor. I don't think so. And again, in this instance, both the child frame and the normal frame were created after the last change of the scale factor. I also repeated this experiment at least twice (restarting Emacs in between). > > When I drag top-left, the bottom-right corner seems to exhibit a more > > gradual drift top-left. When I drag bottom-right, I moves top-left a > > lot more quickly (even if I drag it in the bottom-right direction). > > This might be related to the fact that we move and resize in two > distinct steps.  I wrote a function to do both in one step but its > behavior is just broken with pure X-builds and I'm not able to find out > what goes wrong (it doesn't work with normal frames either). > > But it obviously might be a by-product of Bug#38452. Could be. But the effect is a lot more pronounced. > > Seems so. Aside from the toolbar icons which are not scaled. The > context menu appears where it should. > > Aha.  Are tooltips well-positioned too? Yup. Using both Lucid and GTK3. > (A side question: Do emacs' native tooltips work with a gtk build - > customizing 'x-gtk-use-system-tooltips' to nil?) Seem to work, yes. Tested with flymake-mode and tooltip-mode on. > > Also, the GTK3 build seems to have the same problem, and it has had > quite a few HiDPI patches applied recently. > > You mean the icons problem? The normal frame resizing problem (with drag-internal-border). The icons are fine.