Am Mo., 14. Apr. 2025 um 10:55 Uhr schrieb Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>:

> > Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 10:08:14 +0200
> > Cc: 77774@debbugs.gnu.org
> > From: Johann Höchtl <johann.hoechtl@gmail.com>
> >
> > I do still believe it is a bug.
>
> Please explain why.
>
> > I changed the definition of to
> >
> > (set-face-attribute 'fill-column-indicator nil :background nil
> > :foreground "white" :stipple '(10 1 " \x0\x0\x0\x0\x0\x0"))
> >
> > one blank representing a single set bit, followed by quite a few null
> > string literals as I do not know what happens if I dynamically change
> > font sizes. Does this influence the necessity to change the bitmap
> > literal of a stipple?
>
> I don't think stipple bitmaps are automatically extended as you change
> the text scale.  Po Lu, is that supposed to work automagically
> somehow?
>
> > Nonetheless, at Linux at scale level 0 a single line is shown, at some
> > increases of the scale level  I see two or more lines, at higher scale
> > levels just one again.
>
> What happens if you enlarge the bitmap even more?
>

I did and made an "absurdly" large  1 by <large> bitmap. It consistently
becomes two lines at scale level +5.

For the sake of simplicity and ruling out other factors I set display scale
level to 100%.

When starting at OS scale level 150%, I see already two stipple lines at
emacs scale mode +0 (no scale)

So there might be a common culprit to the misbehaviour.


> > Also, display-line-numbers-mode influences the position of the stipples.
> > Which IMHO shouldn't be the case.
>
> True.  But that is a different problem.
>