From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jul 08 17:18:02 2013 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Jul 2013 21:18:02 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40261 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UwIoq-0003oX-Fv for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 17:18:01 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38465) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UwIon-0003o8-R0 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 17:17:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UwIof-0005Yf-2R for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 17:17:52 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:58594) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UwIoe-0005YV-WA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 17:17:49 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40161) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UwIoc-000240-Et for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 17:17:48 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UwIoa-0005Xk-1V for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 17:17:46 -0400 Received: from mail.wooz.org ([216.15.33.194]:33444) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UwIoZ-0005XV-Rv for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 17:17:43 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 864DD10803F8 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 17:08:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.wooz.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (carnies.wooz.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ckVJ0s-Lya+s for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 17:08:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from limelight.wooz.org (limelight.wooz.org [192.168.11.41]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 56F8810800C9 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 17:08:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 17:08:08 -0400 From: Barry Warsaw To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Subject: 24.3; split-window-keep-point breaks shell tab completion Message-ID: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> Organization: Damn Crazy Followers of the Horn X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.19; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/3RROFf6j4Zf9y1/1pxbZHUN"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) --Sig_/3RROFf6j4Zf9y1/1pxbZHUN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Start `emacs -Q` (make the window full screen height, 80 columns wide) M-x shell RET (in the shell buffer) $ cd /tmp $ mkdir foo $ cd foo $ touch aa.txt ab.txt cc.txt dd.txt ee.txt ff.txt gg.txt hh.txt ii.txt jj.t= xt kk.txt ll.txt mm.txt nn.txt oo.txt pp.txt qq.txt rr.txt ss.txt tt.txt uu= .txt vv.txt ww.txt xx.txt yy.txt zz.txt $ ls -l $ ls -l (this is just to fill the buffer with output. now your shell prompt should be the last line at the bottom of the frame, if not, hit C-l a few times until it is.) $ cat a With `(setq split-window-keep-point t)` you will see the window split, with the top window scrolled to leave point just after the `a` in the middle of the window. The bottom window will have the completions for aa.txt and ab.txt With `(setq split-window-keep-point nil)` you will not get any window split, but point will jump someplace higher up in the window (e.g. for me it jumps to just after the gg.txt line). In GNU Emacs 24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.8.2) of 2013-06-14 on komainu, modified by Debian Windowing system distributor `The X.Org Foundation', version 11.0.11303000 System Description: Ubuntu Saucy Salamander (development branch) Configured using: `configure '--build' 'x86_64-linux-gnu' '--build' 'x86_64-linux-gnu' '--prefix=3D/usr' '--sharedstatedir=3D/var/lib' '--libexecdir=3D/usr/lib' '--localstatedir=3D/var/lib' '--infodir=3D/usr/share/info' '--mandir=3D/usr/share/man' '--with-pop=3Dyes' '--enable-locallisppath=3D/etc/emacs24:/etc/emacs:/usr/local/share/emacs/2= 4.3/site-lisp:/usr/local/share/emacs/site-lisp:/usr/share/emacs/24.3/site-l= isp:/usr/share/emacs/site-lisp' '--with-crt-dir=3D/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu' '--with-x=3Dyes' '--with-x-toolkit=3Dgtk3' '--with-toolkit-scroll-bars' 'build_alias=3Dx86_64-linux-gnu' 'CFLAGS=3D-g -O2 -fstack-protector --param=3Dssp-buffer-size=3D4 -Wformat -Werror=3Dformat-security -Wall' 'LDFLAGS=3D-Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -Wl,-z,relro' 'CPPFLAGS=3D-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=3D2'' Important settings: value of $LC_COLLATE: en_US.UTF-8 value of $LC_CTYPE: en_US.UTF-8 value of $LC_MESSAGES: en_US.UTF-8 value of $LANG: en_US.UTF-8 locale-coding-system: utf-8-unix default enable-multibyte-characters: t Major mode: Shell Minor modes in effect: erc-notifications-mode: t delete-selection-mode: t icomplete-mode: t shell-dirtrack-mode: t erc-spelling-mode: t erc-services-mode: t erc-ring-mode: t erc-networks-mode: t erc-netsplit-mode: t erc-menu-mode: t erc-list-mode: t erc-pcomplete-mode: t erc-button-mode: t erc-fill-mode: t erc-stamp-mode: t erc-autojoin-mode: t show-paren-mode: t savehist-mode: t rcirc-track-minor-mode: t global-whitespace-mode: t erc-track-mode: t erc-track-minor-mode: t erc-match-mode: t erc-irccontrols-mode: t erc-noncommands-mode: t erc-move-to-prompt-mode: t erc-readonly-mode: t desktop-save-mode: t tooltip-mode: t mouse-wheel-mode: t file-name-shadow-mode: t global-font-lock-mode: t font-lock-mode: t auto-composition-mode: t auto-encryption-mode: t auto-compression-mode: t column-number-mode: t line-number-mode: t transient-mark-mode: t --Sig_/3RROFf6j4Zf9y1/1pxbZHUN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJR2yo4AAoJEBJutWOnSwa/+wQQAJQV2enhhVCXJ5Nk5ThUt1PX 6XtAghknYie5hgzp6SzolivEJfPQJS2mJx8h260eILQ7uvG5avY1GY8lwdHmGaBj M5nBU0vrkMBh12CUDb+MGRb57C7+3ry/vj/chJy+is/PSmrjHqoiapQ/aNaholdx kyFWLnK0MyodYn3N8ROFSSGv5LroSazeqphNSxGc78kpKxJIUAAep7WBF2SFEuLj aLWDw+7jvEKUKhbj5rBJC6Xc5EbuME+oZkCHchN55OG3h4A9cx+QKAzCl2CAcgOz OoQ0IR0QlFdKnSLSXOYelPJUGqP6E/Fr7gqexJPc+tWvzjO/6wHqVM0EgyFwWNvL oLrBbI0FCMN9b10RnSaVv4d9pZqoyz9Q6Qxa1Xhn/yE6MlGN/8iUPzYnITlY3+yB LEVyNqyX8DSgkUHz5PqJ9668ywhbK2bo6ejyqzisBemf1eVN/+fbQ894fLsXXdnW IZVwrR8WZBVoOp88GYc2+j85t9HIW06BHkh9PMzXIZJzPenZglm+EzL4FqRLQiTx uPhO4NjiVfqdmsOD61bUbUtXsZG7vfT9H+lALxAFOXA/rHo8Qqxr9TrQiJC8NSI2 0DsAH+SxpDHHcQmE+XiBws6xsuN17VP/W5kICfl/lEkoicRVUYlz9OjsprMLEah5 2MU3wjU6PFyiMxXmQJYT =D7+W -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/3RROFf6j4Zf9y1/1pxbZHUN-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jul 11 15:37:54 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Jul 2013 19:37:54 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48432 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UxMgb-00019y-K1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 15:37:53 -0400 Received: from mail.wooz.org ([216.15.33.194]:42469) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UxMgZ-00019e-4Q for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 15:37:52 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C28410801F4 for <14829@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 15:37:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.wooz.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (carnies.wooz.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8wBd96i-DKxl for <14829@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 15:37:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from anarchist (anarchist.wooz.org [192.168.11.111]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 77F5110800C9 for <14829@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 15:37:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 15:37:43 -0400 From: Barry Warsaw To: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org Message-ID: <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> Organization: Damn Crazy Followers of the Horn X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/hvYL_XxJtd43XQDO+S1cBTN"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: This fixes it for me. ; ; Work around a bug in split-window-keep-point and completion. (defadvice completion-at-point (around completion-at-point-around) "Point safe completion" (let ((split-window-keep-point t)) ad-do-it)) (ad-activate 'completion-at-point) [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.8 MISSING_SUBJECT Missing Subject: header 0.2 NO_SUBJECT Extra score for no subject X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: This fixes it for me. ;; Work around a bug in split-window-keep-point and completion. (defadvice completion-at-point (around completion-at-point-around) "Point safe completion" (let ((split-window-keep-point t)) ad-do-it)) (ad-activate 'completion-at-point) [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.8 MISSING_SUBJECT Missing Subject: header 0.2 NO_SUBJECT Extra score for no subject --Sig_/hvYL_XxJtd43XQDO+S1cBTN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This fixes it for me. ;; Work around a bug in split-window-keep-point and completion. (defadvice completion-at-point (around completion-at-point-around) "Point safe completion" (let ((split-window-keep-point t)) ad-do-it)) (ad-activate 'completion-at-point) --Sig_/hvYL_XxJtd43XQDO+S1cBTN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJR3wmHAAoJEBJutWOnSwa/mN4QAIl/zwZXl4QVqvQfzbaUGfp7 ZE/YOmrqmiqwUtTtobUd1yNpgyWupYvye+RUSY9c6JKgweVKdnxACFCbcPpyZLfn 6AYe2wHuKKaefFo0x0aDbo61s8STu0GQXLlHFOvuYbsy8M0IGGeZbuoLebxqr1ap /Xu6qd/6PrMUe+N9yhT0xxeiOluw87RdnHqYjR5TOmbU1mo9ZvxzhgCFLL6Q1Wti cSbAE7x6w/EmjJ1ctVzE6q956Nj3vUqVG5XHIuCQHF9VxFC8Tnme0V286tQUQth4 5IEdk8na2oM92CyQAwENj/ITcUXEp3Cru6a//xv4DeOGZzKpIMiFatfEoj3ogl4H 4kPb9Wj1NL2kfIZFg1AROFYHwm92zpFdBsa91BNG+ByBON1jHC9QrBx3IJW3JFd5 B0LR534NZGCOvGPcFv0o7ZpGLueGEmjbW6bJc0ghU7o03jt4JUObFEJQ2+RGEL0+ 18dtAUm9SaRHzORQiPLxYqSjHtqaIQSrbF5uacSanduF684ZCvxtatusdWQOKL8E FpS3HCw1iKk19lKjcpoY8lg9IvAHbbYwOBBKYSbfpk93ih9Iz50xR6VDPiuHp7Or Tciz9BS155/wEedCkrtS4UlO/m8XUDF4KTiH3rvbIqkBv1m5LOnwo47wrhMKJHZd usVl5puUZb4Idf7/d91i =TTU1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/hvYL_XxJtd43XQDO+S1cBTN-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jul 12 04:20:41 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jul 2013 08:20:41 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49482 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UxYan-00041Q-3t for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 04:20:41 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:56201) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UxYak-00040v-H8 for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 04:20:39 -0400 Received: from [62.47.40.146] ([62.47.40.146]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0LcEPJ-1UVbps2g8T-00jVhQ; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:20:26 +0200 Message-ID: <51DFBC46.6020709@gmx.at> Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:20:22 +0200 From: martin rudalics MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Barry Warsaw Subject: Re: bug#14829: 24.3; split-window-keep-point breaks shell tab completion References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> In-Reply-To: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:iZI8BiQORHkTgCGQB7Z4lyt4ZHED34X00bMJcC51gPEcq37jkj4 QB52OZ53xkJucjA9lsdCkcnXIbsPJNJok3EpuRPU5pXouoWYNnIr8lKyqHt65EQUN/+BxUx WPEqr2cyrmwGrhLppdyNuGXCdrpkJBionW2HzBrN1SKT1AlJS6IvmKa0Jmp377Q4PIYkkeP uioq71j7TnwNl2PeOARqQ== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) > With `(setq split-window-keep-point t)` you will see the window split, > with the top window scrolled to leave point just after the `a` in the > middle of the window. The bottom window will have the completions for > aa.txt and ab.txt > > With `(setq split-window-keep-point nil)` you will not get any window > split, but point will jump someplace higher up in the window (e.g. for > me it jumps to just after the gg.txt line). `split-window-below' here does (setq new-window (split-window nil size)) (unless split-window-keep-point so I don't understand how setting `split-window-keep-point' can affect the decisison whether to split the window. Does anyone know where this behavior comes from? martin From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jul 12 05:26:49 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jul 2013 09:26:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49631 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UxZcm-00071x-RN for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 05:26:49 -0400 Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:54631) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UxZcj-00071U-Lf for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 05:26:46 -0400 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MPT00H00GG0WL00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 12:26:39 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MPT00H3DGWFIQB0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 12:26:39 +0300 (IDT) Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 12:26:34 +0300 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#14829: 24.3; split-window-keep-point breaks shell tab completion In-reply-to: <51DFBC46.6020709@gmx.at> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: martin rudalics Message-id: <83bo685dth.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <51DFBC46.6020709@gmx.at> X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, barry@python.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) > Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:20:22 +0200 > From: martin rudalics > Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org > > > With `(setq split-window-keep-point t)` you will see the window split, > > with the top window scrolled to leave point just after the `a` in the > > middle of the window. The bottom window will have the completions for > > aa.txt and ab.txt > > > > With `(setq split-window-keep-point nil)` you will not get any window > > split, but point will jump someplace higher up in the window (e.g. for > > me it jumps to just after the gg.txt line). > > `split-window-below' here does > > (setq new-window (split-window nil size)) > (unless split-window-keep-point > > so I don't understand how setting `split-window-keep-point' can affect > the decisison whether to split the window. Maybe it is split, and then deleted, before we have a chance of displaying it? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jul 12 06:13:10 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jul 2013 10:13:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49667 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UxaLe-0000Jc-Bk for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 06:13:10 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:57987) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UxaLb-0000J2-UV for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 06:13:09 -0400 Received: from [62.47.41.10] ([62.47.41.10]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0MVeCF-1UgDHG2qJb-00Yy3Z; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 12:13:01 +0200 Message-ID: <51DFD6A9.9020901@gmx.at> Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 12:12:57 +0200 From: martin rudalics MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#14829: 24.3; split-window-keep-point breaks shell tab completion References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <51DFBC46.6020709@gmx.at> <83bo685dth.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83bo685dth.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:4EotP5dq/JQocX5D6EtEOfXOj4e852pTmWLjMBWMiSe7fZzl2Eg aUPnGamhauvoTvUjRJ50TLlvV3jNd8IWsEjy+ClRyyylAcmCRZiVSU8UCVCKo3uiGJI90ea 9yvsQtOzdbKiXCIvrl3QRa5ueJLkyIlX4Nxa0ob2NgxgXeaj8aEH4UGS7lOQNTM1FP779c8 OkY5S6g62IgyS5Wiy9Bvw== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, barry@python.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) > Maybe it is split, and then deleted, before we have a chance of > displaying it? Maybe it is not split at all for other reasons. But that decision should never be affected by `split-window-keep-point'. Barry, can you check whether and/or why not a window splitting occurs? martin From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jul 12 10:12:14 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jul 2013 14:12:14 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50410 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Uxe4z-0001xg-K0 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:12:14 -0400 Received: from mail.wooz.org ([216.15.33.194]:49175) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Uxe4x-0001xS-4X for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:12:12 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2FDF1080196; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:12:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.wooz.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (carnies.wooz.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1172twqsld-D; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:12:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from anarchist (anarchist.wooz.org [192.168.11.111]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5F74A108012D; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:12:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:12:04 -0400 From: Barry Warsaw To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#14829: 24.3; split-window-keep-point breaks shell tab completion Message-ID: <20130712101204.02096af9@anarchist> In-Reply-To: <83bo685dth.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <51DFBC46.6020709@gmx.at> <83bo685dth.fsf@gnu.org> Organization: Damn Crazy Followers of the Horn X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/d9WSWLE/sFXh..3TD1o+/_c"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: martin rudalics , 14829@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) --Sig_/d9WSWLE/sFXh..3TD1o+/_c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Jul 12, 2013, at 12:26 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >Maybe it is split, and then deleted, before we have a chance of >displaying it? I think that's exactly what's happening. I did a long session of edebug tracing and observed that behavior (split, then deleted). I'm sorry that I don't remember the details - it was quite a long spelunk through the Elisp. --Sig_/d9WSWLE/sFXh..3TD1o+/_c Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJR4A60AAoJEBJutWOnSwa/mswP/jksecPip+Cqs3hn1akIz29r WEpcGN94b181Epn6yCPYNj8jgZnm9876WYn2yfuzwP0O14XkyWXMa8S5Mq8nJz5I JPSihzypcaEhTe8fBPxf7h/hWgb3Bvs7wzdTP4sFSlIk4equdr2qGeiIuAGsbHfX +k3WTDQ9/yozXWN7oxKE493vluwtdjdC1WnuevWq7GhzeDIIZSqk/3OyeIsNQ2td MJu2d9RqDgMdqCkp8CsoHekZnWxd7MrEcF+zkbw6oXq3KK3FjYRedoFzAfL3mjDF GvhB7fAmqLyOZ5apeNV8BJvg+BsIeOPwTkoKoAwt5cw6IibFw8Et8Cp+FqBCxVx1 ufdxbgswGBmxS1ouvRlFUwA2amWpJAOyCrGflivOd4Ej7opPLCZvz5R/JrzjXMeo WuOZLZDoEhaKpgGlbyiyNye+hIGu+uzdhjG9/LelCTxb7MzP2G8kL3kXi67IDWiu NBFS61Vz4DavokXJ4LthofH4aGbhTLvqxiW/H9MLmplg/dU+oj7KOYNiz5H2Wqpt yhdc6gnJxUuxsyIuukACMEGFm+gMEooGAPC0+V1CJW0tmNYX+3cROdY17H52N5QW OE1f7vBq8BuyO6LhaX7Dcq5xxNKvsfrk6v+LOx86ZjZICUVG4XJJWbfGAvHg30a+ jij8CrrpGuZ9qbzrD74q =oVLs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/d9WSWLE/sFXh..3TD1o+/_c-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jul 12 10:18:48 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jul 2013 14:18:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50464 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UxeBL-0002CM-Nw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:18:48 -0400 Received: from mail.wooz.org ([216.15.33.194]:49227) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UxeBJ-0002Bz-I0 for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:18:46 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F8D71080451; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:18:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.wooz.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (carnies.wooz.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wprHYIZ7FeJN; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:18:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from anarchist (anarchist.wooz.org [192.168.11.111]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D68BA1080075; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:18:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 10:18:38 -0400 From: Barry Warsaw To: martin rudalics Subject: Re: bug#14829: 24.3; split-window-keep-point breaks shell tab completion Message-ID: <20130712101838.21d21cd3@anarchist> In-Reply-To: <51DFD6A9.9020901@gmx.at> References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <51DFBC46.6020709@gmx.at> <83bo685dth.fsf@gnu.org> <51DFD6A9.9020901@gmx.at> Organization: Damn Crazy Followers of the Horn X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/rG5=7dh.LqD2LppMlSWAG4L"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) --Sig_/rG5=7dh.LqD2LppMlSWAG4L Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Jul 12, 2013, at 12:12 PM, martin rudalics wrote: > > Maybe it is split, and then deleted, before we have a chance of > > displaying it? > >Maybe it is not split at all for other reasons. But that decision >should never be affected by `split-window-keep-point'. Barry, can you >check whether and/or why not a window splitting occurs? With this workaround: (defadvice completion-at-point (around completion-at-point-around) "Point safe completion" (let ((split-window-keep-point t)) ad-do-it)) (ad-activate 'completion-at-point) and the setup I mentioned earlier (e.g. shell buffer filled with output, prompt on bottom line of window)... If you deactivate the advice, what happens when you hit TAB is that you don= 't see the split, but you also don't see the completion buffer. Point just ju= mps up to the end-of-line on a line about half-way up the window. With the advice activated, the window gets split, with the completion buffer on bottom, and the shell buffer scrolled up so that point remains on the prompt line which is now approximately in the middle of its buffer (looks to be a few lines lower, but that's really immaterial). I notice the exact same behavior in an ERC window, so it's clearly related = to completion-at-point. Hence the advice in the workaround. --Sig_/rG5=7dh.LqD2LppMlSWAG4L Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJR4BA+AAoJEBJutWOnSwa/GMcP/3q4qa6jH3RAeFHLi4xkRrjZ g5CyM6PvVQ52Fyo6kIDUKobD/3dEw4vZ1N+168MgH78FAYj95t42kEqImWwqb5y5 1vKI9GYtN8rncgxSlY48JILHO+s/J6tGjmH/Lsp3vlZlayJjRMOeH0LZiF4ngP1/ B7RGkpLOPkNZX/HiSF2ejCvLN1AUzn7LAdzv3u5admFweL4Kf/J3sItmkGIVeIyN bNxxq00/X5bn92ehM7O5KGsGukAB9OBynzTVgWu6MPUaIw/t5QsyOPlU0+9ZKuzE jo2ZjUXAkf3wDrSkSjIDNaCtOQkJEi7YsHOQcXU3gx1PL3ZbTnF49vhquqhkMTEm WRHmI7iKsAPqww27+LShEik0R8LjSRIGXFnilAOefhIALRvlo1NgEGPzdjyZPCrz n6XmgzA6Rmq+T+27gpZUS9t4dfV8yIwe1+5TRNw+ay35kGJKxVihHnwf399lJyxh b9GBKWr5Pw2BjpDtNLyzb3sq8UDF7SyfPXT1Kt8I0xHEiVE0i1cCAwTYkHMZuy4d 6ml5rdJ3jfQp3zPaSCUR8ybs3qSjycQR4piVQFXlQvXiSCPfemkRG4MGXEntBVFt Ha+rn5kOf+wbpAVZjXdARq7g0xe1ZY6qLyyd03AtFtf5SRARwJciwuOdO/64hAi2 G+Qhxy7LywDIzwWROMCE =Qop0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/rG5=7dh.LqD2LppMlSWAG4L-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jul 22 13:18:30 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jul 2013 17:18:30 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43067 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1Jkj-0006gJ-EG for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:18:29 -0400 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:12598) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1Jkh-0006ft-GF for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:18:28 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABK/CFG4rw7r/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjBQsLNBIUGA0kAYgdBsEtkQoDpHqBXoMT X-IPAS-Result: Av4EABK/CFG4rw7r/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjBQsLNBIUGA0kAYgdBsEtkQoDpHqBXoMT X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="19538066" Received: from 184-175-14-235.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([184.175.14.235]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 22 Jul 2013 13:18:15 -0400 Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id E782A6D694; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:18:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: Barry Warsaw , martin rudalics Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) Message-ID: References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:18:20 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> (Barry Warsaw's message of "Thu, 11 Jul 2013 15:37:43 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 2.3 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > This fixes it for me. > ; ; Work around a bug in split-window-keep-point and completion. > (defadvice completion-at-point (around completion-at-point-around) > "Point safe completion" > (let ((split-window-keep-point t)) > ad-do-it)) > (ad-activate 'completion-at-point) [...] Content analysis details: (2.3 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [206.248.154.182 listed in list.dnswl.org] 1.0 SPF_SOFTFAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (softfail) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.3 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > This fixes it for me. > ;; Work around a bug in split-window-keep-point and completion. > (defadvice completion-at-point (around completion-at-point-around) > "Point safe completion" > (let ((split-window-keep-point t)) > ad-do-it)) > (ad-activate 'completion-at-point) [...] Content analysis details: (2.3 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [206.248.154.182 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 1.0 SPF_SOFTFAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (softfail) > This fixes it for me. > ;; Work around a bug in split-window-keep-point and completion. > (defadvice completion-at-point (around completion-at-point-around) > "Point safe completion" > (let ((split-window-keep-point t)) > ad-do-it)) > (ad-activate 'completion-at-point) Hmm... looking at it further I see that: - split-window-keep-point defaults to t. - the problem could affect other cases than completion. Basically, I'm leaning towards forcing split-window-keep-point to t in display-buffer, since AFAICT a value of nil only makes sense when you split a window into two so that they both show the same buffer, whereas in the case of display-buffer, you always want the current buffer's point to stay put. Why do you (and other people) set split-window-keep-point to nil? What is the expected behavior from it? The docstring seems to indicate it's only meant to affect C-x 2 rather than all cases where we create a new window. Martin? Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jul 22 13:37:26 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jul 2013 17:37:27 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43082 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1K34-0007IQ-CB for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:37:26 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:52403) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1K30-0007IA-V8 for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:37:24 -0400 Received: from [62.47.48.222] ([62.47.48.222]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0MFLhE-1UvnkO25Xo-00EOdA for <14829@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:37:16 +0200 Message-ID: <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:37:07 +0200 From: martin rudalics MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:ui9RlIE1bP5+10DTrOpjl7uyzVmFjH/YuT8WMNHXIfD8seujOFR em27eZVBbwHUVlbJNMym3w7DCDEa6TgqrFPV8bUBktoVHk0/KhImcm5nzHXnssb9nsTu7ml QlhAKJuI/Ru3ayM/baulloZ6YofmUml2L07EZoxBW7Edu16wt7SJA/ZCwzgy2PxgnfTHu8d NZMsOWPSJo1YFtzVryTrw== X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > Hmm... looking at it further I see that: > - split-window-keep-point defaults to t. > - the problem could affect other cases than completion. > Basically, I'm leaning towards forcing split-window-keep-point to t in > display-buffer, since AFAICT a value of nil only makes sense when you > split a window into two so that they both show the same buffer, whereas > in the case of display-buffer, you always want the current buffer's > point to stay put. [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.22 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, Barry Warsaw X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > Hmm... looking at it further I see that: > - split-window-keep-point defaults to t. > - the problem could affect other cases than completion. > Basically, I'm leaning towards forcing split-window-keep-point to t in > display-buffer, since AFAICT a value of nil only makes sense when you > split a window into two so that they both show the same buffer, whereas > in the case of display-buffer, you always want the current buffer's > point to stay put. [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.22 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record > Hmm... looking at it further I see that: > - split-window-keep-point defaults to t. > - the problem could affect other cases than completion. > Basically, I'm leaning towards forcing split-window-keep-point to t in > display-buffer, since AFAICT a value of nil only makes sense when you > split a window into two so that they both show the same buffer, whereas > in the case of display-buffer, you always want the current buffer's > point to stay put. With `inhibit-same-window' t one might want to show the same buffer in the new window. > The docstring seems to indicate it's only meant to affect C-x 2 rather > than all cases where we create a new window. Martin? It happens because \\[split-window-below] gets substituted by C-x 2. Why not declare `split-window-keep-point' obsolete and always keep point? martin From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jul 22 13:41:17 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jul 2013 17:41:17 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43086 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1K6n-0007S6-8n for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:41:17 -0400 Received: from mail.wooz.org ([216.15.33.194]:35033) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1K6k-0007Rh-Du for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:41:16 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D24CC10801B7; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:41:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.wooz.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (carnies.wooz.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F+3rVrLetsoV; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:41:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from limelight.wooz.org (limelight.wooz.org [192.168.11.41]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7EFBC1080071; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:41:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:41:10 -0400 From: Barry Warsaw To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) Message-ID: <20130722134110.0e8f042a@limelight.wooz.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> Organization: Damn Crazy Followers of the Horn X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/oib01fxGnbeSR4uTz8wAVep"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Jul 22, 2013, at 01:18 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> This fixes it for me. >> ; ; Work around a bug in split-window-keep-point and completion. >> (defadvice completion-at-point (around completion-at-point-around) >> "Point safe completion" >> (let ((split-window-keep-point t)) >> ad-do-it)) >> (ad-activate 'completion-at-point) > >Hmm... looking at it further I see that: >- split-window-keep-point defaults to t. >- the problem could affect other cases than completion. >Basically, I'm leaning towards forcing split-window-keep-point to t in >display-buffer, since AFAICT a value of nil only makes sense when you >split a window into two so that they both show the same buffer, whereas >in the case of display-buffer, you always want the current buffer's >point to stay put. [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: martin rudalics , 14829@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Jul 22, 2013, at 01:18 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> This fixes it for me. >> ;; Work around a bug in split-window-keep-point and completion. >> (defadvice completion-at-point (around completion-at-point-around) >> "Point safe completion" >> (let ((split-window-keep-point t)) >> ad-do-it)) >> (ad-activate 'completion-at-point) > >Hmm... looking at it further I see that: >- split-window-keep-point defaults to t. >- the problem could affect other cases than completion. >Basically, I'm leaning towards forcing split-window-keep-point to t in >display-buffer, since AFAICT a value of nil only makes sense when you >split a window into two so that they both show the same buffer, whereas >in the case of display-buffer, you always want the current buffer's >point to stay put. [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record --Sig_/oib01fxGnbeSR4uTz8wAVep Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Jul 22, 2013, at 01:18 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> This fixes it for me. >> ;; Work around a bug in split-window-keep-point and completion. >> (defadvice completion-at-point (around completion-at-point-around) >> "Point safe completion" >> (let ((split-window-keep-point t)) >> ad-do-it)) >> (ad-activate 'completion-at-point) > >Hmm... looking at it further I see that: >- split-window-keep-point defaults to t. >- the problem could affect other cases than completion. >Basically, I'm leaning towards forcing split-window-keep-point to t in >display-buffer, since AFAICT a value of nil only makes sense when you >split a window into two so that they both show the same buffer, whereas >in the case of display-buffer, you always want the current buffer's >point to stay put. This seems reasonable to me, as long as it doesn't affect C-x 2. >Why do you (and other people) set split-window-keep-point to nil? >What is the expected behavior from it? > >The docstring seems to indicate it's only meant to affect C-x 2 rather >than all cases where we create a new window. Martin? C-x 2 is the only reason I set it to nil. There used to be an old XEmacs h= ack (might have been some of my personal elisp) that did what I think was called "slow-splitting" although it was not actually slow. It did exactly what C-= x 2 with s-w-k-p set to nil does. I love this for tall windows since in most cases, nothing changes except you get a modeline in the middle of the window where the split occurs. So I'm all in favor of keeping the behavior for C-x 2 and inhibiting it for all other purposes. I have definitely encountered other situations that the defadvice above does not handle. One example is pdb-track in python-mode. When you hit the breakpoint, the shell buffer is split with the code shown below, but the split does not happen correct. Point is left at the same bo= gus place as described in the original bug report. --Sig_/oib01fxGnbeSR4uTz8wAVep Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJR7W62AAoJEBJutWOnSwa/+QgP/RzRxxKeBMob1zax0iJ1jk6m bbCm4CYY7HUt+4gQA643vttm0/st1VgHyAg8qRjG2LW4pX5/nnhcvR15c2ZASnXx gQvAhTC+6R7fDabTGVlyvKXt46fiH4XW8P6Qf5iXSbzdYokgccsCbxga8agx5shh 431KnJ7I7sl8L3Iq5uohh6WcoVw+Vqxej0CnltDzEpDT7e4CzP8nYpExpaq3NqNl rJqkIrJrvoEEzKXylQ2Oy0Nw1QF+F9sAnbvq4m7KZMtZ2P0lDtUEPqTDEbz2qQAc A+CWlSnDe62NSIUJvLXV3JxyRpUjerobCq+Lalld0THPRifq9bpGql3SG93LRCpd xH27PQ0MDNCdXJ2VRPdIPl/JSi9il8oVNKe6XpLOx+bKiQkrYmyTyXggyiCHAwJt u+hh0/sXt90hFjImm2EJBdLAPaNyf+Au4tEpNISKagekq9nXktXHMs9CKCbj3JTG s5IXU/HZLrKAiDLXuj06f6K+2/gQNwzqzAuzZkfdBNDWSyfoRCpAV9UbOh5E84G8 nu7RKGF848jPcKg1hyWn4/9xRzH6ngi8N0jB59Vln96XhWVFxjb/jSDGnOfeyPgi tcmjVAniGg4GliuL0yWJBfsLtjl3AWsfwAHFH35WHuq3jeK/hrwSqNIoP115IVA0 vqT2wlyoCOxlLZA5tY39 =C65D -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/oib01fxGnbeSR4uTz8wAVep-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jul 22 13:42:29 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jul 2013 17:42:29 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43090 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1K7w-0007Uw-TR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:42:29 -0400 Received: from mail.wooz.org ([216.15.33.194]:35044) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1K7u-0007Uh-O0 for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:42:27 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C41710803F1; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:42:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.wooz.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (carnies.wooz.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L05GfmD1w-kn; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:42:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from limelight.wooz.org (limelight.wooz.org [192.168.11.41]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 257CF1080071; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:42:21 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:42:22 -0400 From: Barry Warsaw To: martin rudalics Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) Message-ID: <20130722134222.72c122d3@limelight.wooz.org> In-Reply-To: <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> Organization: Damn Crazy Followers of the Horn X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/RB1LEMP+/N/cppl1tabPxmX"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Jul 22, 2013, at 07:37 PM, martin rudalics wrote: >It happens because \\[split-window-below] gets substituted by C-x 2. > >Why not declare `split-window-keep-point' obsolete and always keep >point? [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Jul 22, 2013, at 07:37 PM, martin rudalics wrote: >It happens because \\[split-window-below] gets substituted by C-x 2. > >Why not declare `split-window-keep-point' obsolete and always keep >point? [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record --Sig_/RB1LEMP+/N/cppl1tabPxmX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Jul 22, 2013, at 07:37 PM, martin rudalics wrote: >It happens because \\[split-window-below] gets substituted by C-x 2. > >Why not declare `split-window-keep-point' obsolete and always keep >point? Please no! C-x 2 with split-window-keep-point nil is a *really* important feature, to me at least. --Sig_/RB1LEMP+/N/cppl1tabPxmX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJR7W7+AAoJEBJutWOnSwa/68gP/2JRIUuF+zGxDpNz5sx2AjqL tnOslr4NKGHuopZzzfVhRoJ/mnJQYIfkkQlp4vXHD7QYPnS6TFJFlJER8MIqkTm2 5Q3mYIu90vGD4QWb8/o0JWc/KfVv87UyEmHkyY7OPbGL+p/Ksq2H6gtJFy4oKh9U kcBkxZzKHXTJKcc184hSUiPxG+fh7ByspPHzUrzLI572J0peTHEmnlynT13tT91Q dsqRH9t9y7yvrcoFUeTIAsU97NYvsL5tR1j5XEtJIwRTzKS7763r5hWeRHeKbHYR X31E2bloX8wfyW+TFBO0om1y3NdgqZcklFsPHEhVUaFcYN9D9llijASU0HWz8bPv N+ndA2G7xXEFAUiM1a6TVJ7Jd4Zv5G3hO/pQQmw+WagZpHeYnxBgtfOYgsxLAI96 tOlisxWm65PUh8t2j21ZLQRIBji9eztdnglR+p2eHVtxCHn+2xiZE5ZzQMuD/Rtw TXNcnz999xyZUlgaUUFE8mOl6VvipR5U+DUoSavcemUlNCz/renCk/3mG5ZyiXLP u0Fn9oe7EimYPebgNmBm9z+d8AuFrMq+/IgmHNzMJLkGR+1169UWQQ0vpduuMaOq IKaF9WPLm+3dcxdp6czzLhZ5mFpuqKWI7NxE1MNVMrJQIKTZ3QUSQLjn5g8svyU4 yNeZvo6MxcGgi6wNiRk7 =OVT3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/RB1LEMP+/N/cppl1tabPxmX-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jul 22 14:56:52 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jul 2013 18:56:52 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43236 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1LHv-00023m-8L for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:56:51 -0400 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:9951) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1LHt-00023M-Fp for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:56:49 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABK/CFG4rw7r/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjEAs0EhQYDSSIHgbBLZEKA6R6gV6DEw X-IPAS-Result: Av4EABK/CFG4rw7r/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjEAs0EhQYDSSIHgbBLZEKA6R6gV6DEw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="19546635" Received: from 184-175-14-235.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([184.175.14.235]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 22 Jul 2013 14:56:37 -0400 Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 0C6D062E1C; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:56:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: martin rudalics Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) Message-ID: References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:56:42 -0400 In-Reply-To: <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:37:07 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 2.3 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: >> Hmm... looking at it further I see that: >> - split-window-keep-point defaults to t. >> - the problem could affect other cases than completion. >> Basically, I'm leaning towards forcing split-window-keep-point to t in >> display-buffer, since AFAICT a value of nil only makes sense when you >> split a window into two so that they both show the same buffer, whereas >> in the case of display-buffer, you always want the current buffer's >> point to stay put. > With `inhibit-same-window' t one might want to show the same buffer in the > new window. [...] Content analysis details: (2.3 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [206.248.154.182 listed in list.dnswl.org] 1.0 SPF_SOFTFAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (softfail) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, Barry Warsaw X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.3 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: >> Hmm... looking at it further I see that: >> - split-window-keep-point defaults to t. >> - the problem could affect other cases than completion. >> Basically, I'm leaning towards forcing split-window-keep-point to t in >> display-buffer, since AFAICT a value of nil only makes sense when you >> split a window into two so that they both show the same buffer, whereas >> in the case of display-buffer, you always want the current buffer's >> point to stay put. > With `inhibit-same-window' t one might want to show the same buffer in the > new window. [...] Content analysis details: (2.3 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [206.248.154.182 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 1.0 SPF_SOFTFAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (softfail) >> Hmm... looking at it further I see that: >> - split-window-keep-point defaults to t. >> - the problem could affect other cases than completion. >> Basically, I'm leaning towards forcing split-window-keep-point to t in >> display-buffer, since AFAICT a value of nil only makes sense when you >> split a window into two so that they both show the same buffer, whereas >> in the case of display-buffer, you always want the current buffer's >> point to stay put. > With `inhibit-same-window' t one might want to show the same buffer in the > new window. I can live with that "problem". Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jul 23 03:10:26 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jul 2013 07:10:26 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44090 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1Wjp-0006Wb-4j for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 03:10:26 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:53132) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1Wjl-0006WC-7k for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 03:10:22 -0400 Received: from [62.47.61.84] ([62.47.61.84]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0LjLwB-1UOsnY0L55-00daga for <14829@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:10:15 +0200 Message-ID: <51EE2C4D.5040702@gmx.at> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:10:05 +0200 From: martin rudalics MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Barry Warsaw Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> <20130722134222.72c122d3@limelight.wooz.org> In-Reply-To: <20130722134222.72c122d3@limelight.wooz.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:pbgO3pVujqWaCg+h5BNdRtVOzXUe6Dg0/vapRpaWNC4VjsBMer4 Fu/5JG0jU9DgUvJ2LML3PzMgs351Of9VkjAqE5jyVZPd9oUX34GxcOew+jlDt2vkdeqkkIp UuLvx9e7lJrqvao8NufLuxiAx59mOQzdGw7+guBgSFboz1+O+Cf7TMveOJsyJD9F7cpGVmN XZZfUeX3C36I6wAdnf7MQ== X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: >> Why not declare `split-window-keep-point' obsolete and always keep >> point? > > Please no! C-x 2 with split-window-keep-point nil is a *really* important > feature, to me at least. OK. Don't worry ;-) [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.22 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: >> Why not declare `split-window-keep-point' obsolete and always keep >> point? > > Please no! C-x 2 with split-window-keep-point nil is a *really* important > feature, to me at least. OK. Don't worry ;-) [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.22 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record >> Why not declare `split-window-keep-point' obsolete and always keep >> point? > > Please no! C-x 2 with split-window-keep-point nil is a *really* important > feature, to me at least. OK. Don't worry ;-) martin From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jul 23 03:10:55 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jul 2013 07:10:55 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44093 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1WkH-0006YX-SK for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 03:10:54 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:54026) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1Wk5-0006Xc-CA for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 03:10:42 -0400 Received: from [62.47.61.84] ([62.47.61.84]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0Lxu7U-1U5PqB1aMO-015Exm for <14829@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:10:35 +0200 Message-ID: <51EE2C61.8080900@gmx.at> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:10:25 +0200 From: martin rudalics MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:500B12WP4rDUvLxSYIRhgyBjTl0cTMLS85KNvWZvaHZWXm5FSda SEdfDrXihqAMK75e0S5Fx/J0CyoTkCsdz/u+yG7L74sz2V+vGaYYwMad+qLZJKW3ZtOZoGv q65OiY4NxfEZfXz9CXfo+/5pJ//FGdWdiRjpicGtb2vE64U5xLRMgV6Xp9ZnqpjY9ewdDeM z+yvgbzHfQ5YP8N/cEKog== X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > I can live with that "problem". So what do we prefer? Handle this option in `split-window-sensibly' or in `split-window-below'? martin [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.21 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, Barry Warsaw X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > I can live with that "problem". So what do we prefer? Handle this option in `split-window-sensibly' or in `split-window-below'? martin [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.21 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record > I can live with that "problem". So what do we prefer? Handle this option in `split-window-sensibly' or in `split-window-below'? martin From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jul 23 09:09:36 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jul 2013 13:09:36 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44545 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1cLQ-00066I-7D for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:09:36 -0400 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:26092) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1cLN-00065L-Hs for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:09:34 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABK/CFFsoXa8/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjEAs0EhQYDSSIHgaxH5AOkQoDpHqBXoMT X-IPAS-Result: Av4EABK/CFFsoXa8/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjEAs0EhQYDSSIHgaxH5AOkQoDpHqBXoMT X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="19601614" Received: from 108-161-118-188.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([108.161.118.188]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 23 Jul 2013 09:09:21 -0400 Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 5F87B62DB7; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:09:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: martin rudalics Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) Message-ID: References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> <51EE2C61.8080900@gmx.at> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:09:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <51EE2C61.8080900@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:10:25 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 2.3 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: >> I can live with that "problem". > So what do we prefer? Handle this option in `split-window-sensibly' or > in `split-window-below'? I think we can start by let-binding split-window-keep-point to t in display-buffer. [...] Content analysis details: (2.3 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [206.248.154.182 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 1.0 SPF_SOFTFAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (softfail) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, Barry Warsaw X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.3 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: >> I can live with that "problem". > So what do we prefer? Handle this option in `split-window-sensibly' or > in `split-window-below'? I think we can start by let-binding split-window-keep-point to t in display-buffer. [...] Content analysis details: (2.3 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [206.248.154.182 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 1.0 SPF_SOFTFAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (softfail) >> I can live with that "problem". > So what do we prefer? Handle this option in `split-window-sensibly' or > in `split-window-below'? I think we can start by let-binding split-window-keep-point to t in display-buffer. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jul 23 09:38:44 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jul 2013 13:38:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44656 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1cnb-0007nr-5k for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:38:43 -0400 Received: from mail.wooz.org ([216.15.33.194]:40416) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1cnP-0007n0-8O for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:38:32 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7256E10801B7; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:38:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.wooz.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (carnies.wooz.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kmjH++fxiuzp; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:38:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from anarchist (anarchist.wooz.org [192.168.11.111]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 162601080071; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:38:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:38:25 -0400 From: Barry Warsaw To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) Message-ID: <20130723093825.19f4a2ee@anarchist> In-Reply-To: References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> <51EE2C61.8080900@gmx.at> Organization: Damn Crazy Followers of the Horn X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/uhd_7Dw3l=IGe=vkDmFBIMt"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Jul 23, 2013, at 09:09 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >>> I can live with that "problem". >> So what do we prefer? Handle this option in `split-window-sensibly' or >> in `split-window-below'? > >I think we can start by let-binding split-window-keep-point to t in >display-buffer. [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: martin rudalics , 14829@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Jul 23, 2013, at 09:09 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >>> I can live with that "problem". >> So what do we prefer? Handle this option in `split-window-sensibly' or >> in `split-window-below'? > >I think we can start by let-binding split-window-keep-point to t in >display-buffer. [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record --Sig_/uhd_7Dw3l=IGe=vkDmFBIMt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Jul 23, 2013, at 09:09 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >>> I can live with that "problem". >> So what do we prefer? Handle this option in `split-window-sensibly' or >> in `split-window-below'? > >I think we can start by let-binding split-window-keep-point to t in >display-buffer. I'm happy to test out a patch if it can be applied to 24.3. --Sig_/uhd_7Dw3l=IGe=vkDmFBIMt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJR7odRAAoJEBJutWOnSwa/NAEP/iYwdBbDubgViSHz2/rDmKaM PfISksx6nhUMGvTsFAno+zRLO7VD2yTDzo5u8AbnJIZcsciPzDiPsS9j9I8B2Q7D c3zduiYO448V2eiErqJSH5kVBJMCYv1ritSc57Al3DVp/BelNi87c+nSN5eJ8Lru Lu8VOZhCYPeVvfmFuy30Lu6WK7Yl7GGy1BqjyqMmaQv4O5WxCOlsbmohEFLezyii MgZVv4DBc6N7GkBW3ilpI+GgChWRFnOUnZiSyi/2Aj1V0/6S6dhEzzrheeNzr15M BCULNDS+aA2AU1tD0zCD26C+PT30D65n314IXWSMk++h8sqb8utoq/l5Co5gxJft 61aAzAzsu0JsMmc/mb+VggxcY/LwcWuBuauKJT2481U9tBHA3+OgEocBl5xUrJPl T6kzt2xeyDowZ4RT+jxeCo6SRlO5tGauxkH09KB+syveUrRoh/hMXEXP11Nm9YWA KfQmcEqje997+a7ZLbaBqf2dxGOGGqn4z0kHvX24YItiKDV5u+xN/JBFZSun4Xpz Xex9FYZEAlzo0DdWsHAXg57Wcew+NWKE2MPI58i1l97+SvcQDiQ3VhZhhJHDPioh M6QbtNY07bji7cti6W/o9btDWFi+RAJmZjIVuzaT7f441Ovl//02rmKogeqh+WFR N75VI0oL2vAGj3vclEXQ =dTuD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/uhd_7Dw3l=IGe=vkDmFBIMt-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jul 25 06:05:08 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Jul 2013 10:05:09 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48653 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V2IQ0-0007cl-CM for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 06:05:08 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:57310) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V2IPx-0007bb-FL for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 06:05:06 -0400 Received: from [62.47.40.73] ([62.47.40.73]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0MXZbS-1UZ2AZ3SwI-00WXQd for <14829@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:04:57 +0200 Message-ID: <51F0F847.2090305@gmx.at> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:04:55 +0200 From: martin rudalics MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> <51EE2C61.8080900@gmx.at> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:Y5Q1Hi+XFN9SK7ZiDZKEUAi8Su/P0eVj4LHkqse2xsZucc7iPa4 7fW1O0FZSBcgBm7ks1K8BsS6Wgnb0hdJU+8sjX4l1jIyCDdj/Y0zNtCmGCTUe959pRLxx8J j/1I64v/yoS8bqz2sJ7ZoulhG67XaLDEZPktI/EoJknoL/5V6xvywQXyYpeGow78YR0VskH 7Qq6NKoVNGLlL37RNj2ZQ== X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > I think we can start by let-binding split-window-keep-point to t in > display-buffer. Done. martin [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.21 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, Barry Warsaw X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > I think we can start by let-binding split-window-keep-point to t in > display-buffer. Done. martin [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.21 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record > I think we can start by let-binding split-window-keep-point to t in > display-buffer. Done. martin From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jul 25 06:05:20 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Jul 2013 10:05:21 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48656 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V2IQB-0007e1-U9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 06:05:20 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:49163) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V2IQ9-0007dD-6w for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 06:05:17 -0400 Received: from [62.47.40.73] ([62.47.40.73]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0MTSKd-1Udj841UKV-00SLbt for <14829@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:05:11 +0200 Message-ID: <51F0F855.30305@gmx.at> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:05:09 +0200 From: martin rudalics MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Barry Warsaw Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> <51EE2C61.8080900@gmx.at> <20130723093825.19f4a2ee@anarchist> In-Reply-To: <20130723093825.19f4a2ee@anarchist> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:W3FUJCDhRXVU1rUZXeQt4tUH54ye23IBNJa3QMwNo7Kywc23s+r 4Dl8wjtaBoqsXODqECpRWgEHXtZLXFP7t4/N3MGRCAyQX4/eRbFhxYDGZ+W7khWzarAcPZ3 0JOtUjFnP5xVr5j5K+AXxd0iLLdREfkvinsY0vDvRT4RnlLCUSc2jVeHMizqdUnNgIvezfn kYzH+QNG/bVm3UKf4VdHg== X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > I'm happy to test out a patch if it can be applied to 24.3. It's trivial, try the one below. Thanks, martin [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.21 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > I'm happy to test out a patch if it can be applied to 24.3. It's trivial, try the one below. Thanks, martin [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.21 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record > I'm happy to test out a patch if it can be applied to 24.3. It's trivial, try the one below. Thanks, martin --- lisp/window.el 2013-07-06 14:24:54 +0000 +++ lisp/window.el 2013-07-25 09:32:11 +0000 @@ -5470,6 +5470,9 @@ (let ((buffer (if (bufferp buffer-or-name) buffer-or-name (get-buffer buffer-or-name))) + ;; Make sure that when we split windows the old window keeps + ;; point, bug#14829. + (split-window-keep-point t) ;; Handle the old form of the first argument. (inhibit-same-window (and action (not (listp action))))) (unless (listp action) (setq action nil)) From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jul 26 22:57:54 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jul 2013 02:57:54 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52090 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V2uhd-0008G1-Mm for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 22:57:53 -0400 Received: from mail.wooz.org ([216.15.33.194]:42113) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V2uha-0008FV-CW for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 22:57:51 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACC2510802D4; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 22:57:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.wooz.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (carnies.wooz.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EYVrfOMvkNtE; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 22:57:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from anarchist (anarchist.wooz.org [192.168.11.111]) by mail.wooz.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 489451080160; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 22:57:44 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 22:52:46 -0400 From: Barry Warsaw To: martin rudalics Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) Message-ID: <20130726225246.39480a2e@anarchist> In-Reply-To: <51F0F855.30305@gmx.at> References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> <51EE2C61.8080900@gmx.at> <20130723093825.19f4a2ee@anarchist> <51F0F855.30305@gmx.at> Organization: Damn Crazy Followers of the Horn X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/lCAVknIR7z73COz=e+CuYe0"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Jul 25, 2013, at 12:05 PM, martin rudalics wrote: >> I'm happy to test out a patch if it can be applied to 24.3. > >It's trivial, try the one below. > >Thanks, martin > >--- lisp/window.el 2013-07-06 14:24:54 +0000 >+++ lisp/window.el 2013-07-25 09:32:11 +0000 >@@ -5470,6 +5470,9 @@ > (let ((buffer (if (bufferp buffer-or-name) > buffer-or-name > (get-buffer buffer-or-name))) >+ ;; Make sure that when we split windows the old window keeps >+ ;; point, bug#14829. >+ (split-window-keep-point t) > ;; Handle the old form of the first argument. > (inhibit-same-window (and action (not (listp action))))) > (unless (listp action) (setq action nil)) [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Jul 25, 2013, at 12:05 PM, martin rudalics wrote: >> I'm happy to test out a patch if it can be applied to 24.3. > >It's trivial, try the one below. > >Thanks, martin > >--- lisp/window.el 2013-07-06 14:24:54 +0000 >+++ lisp/window.el 2013-07-25 09:32:11 +0000 >@@ -5470,6 +5470,9 @@ > (let ((buffer (if (bufferp buffer-or-name) > buffer-or-name > (get-buffer buffer-or-name))) >+ ;; Make sure that when we split windows the old window keeps >+ ;; point, bug#14829. >+ (split-window-keep-point t) > ;; Handle the old form of the first argument. > (inhibit-same-window (and action (not (listp action))))) > (unless (listp action) (setq action nil)) [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record --Sig_/lCAVknIR7z73COz=e+CuYe0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Jul 25, 2013, at 12:05 PM, martin rudalics wrote: >> I'm happy to test out a patch if it can be applied to 24.3. > >It's trivial, try the one below. > >Thanks, martin > >--- lisp/window.el 2013-07-06 14:24:54 +0000 >+++ lisp/window.el 2013-07-25 09:32:11 +0000 >@@ -5470,6 +5470,9 @@ > (let ((buffer (if (bufferp buffer-or-name) > buffer-or-name > (get-buffer buffer-or-name))) >+ ;; Make sure that when we split windows the old window keeps >+ ;; point, bug#14829. >+ (split-window-keep-point t) > ;; Handle the old form of the first argument. > (inhibit-same-window (and action (not (listp action))))) > (unless (listp action) (setq action nil)) Works great, thanks. I've applied this to Ubuntu 13.10's version of Emacs 24.3. --Sig_/lCAVknIR7z73COz=e+CuYe0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJR8zX+AAoJEBJutWOnSwa/ZzAP/3Cf8HCKz/9JaRdWYTN1RUxs SYCSoFsWVAwVLFaqhDRE9vqNWNVTxpO6xYrSaW9Y48QCxVpYYVOVKcCrGKpYyB+m ZRz3K3rwlyEMOe7DUMOOMZYEegNg5A4aL4Q0/vKwozoW+x/eWoUcQa9BCX/P6eVt twQjtwvmNMxNZ7Rx/cf5KI2aIsSarDuMOusDo1mJ8iPpJWVy138CBQFg5vArQXUX ylRzxu73YJckklDJYJF7mGCDRMfkyWcwrDoIDjdN0PI5akJbhNYRSbOIjXPIDCvX WZMX7ZAP7o9lVJb+9iDeH5nAzx9pProWISs3hCl2iGOgGx+qqAZ5JYJ1KfkuCOZC nHy42eBrsUph8xP91z0jsSNDK1SoXG8mm4/rFsMgPTeaPhQnlKqbc2jFhsYCkirV tSGm0ueitN3dBeVHlppQSEKBACT7/LyqaqU7j1fVrxN6lG4V1ztduEGzOzXx83kG b7ep56ZflTqoSXDlsFcMatX3+dAj5q0BZHSBUQxUZ+S+ERi5nsSGxeCCK8cwX4jT ADACEmrsSr/3TwyCYROjIHLxcOygCFou4dOiye54lYGHK5hRgoXT6KGZNyZaOXdM uXT9aYsnSB0+yVN9bQ5DJKLQtIpxWYUzIqVzhFgnc37fMJ9GOxvkqruVazLoOMlh FBbT+6X0WAE8+/MHZaEe =CaLW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/lCAVknIR7z73COz=e+CuYe0-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jul 27 04:19:03 2013 Received: (at 14829) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jul 2013 08:19:03 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52333 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V2ziR-0003tW-Bl for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 04:19:03 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]:64617) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V2ziO-0003sD-4y for 14829@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 04:19:01 -0400 Received: from [62.47.51.209] ([62.47.51.209]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0M2tKM-1UCgJ93WUQ-00sd4l for <14829@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 10:18:54 +0200 Message-ID: <51F38269.6060008@gmx.at> Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 10:18:49 +0200 From: martin rudalics MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Barry Warsaw Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> <51EE2C61.8080900@gmx.at> <20130723093825.19f4a2ee@anarchist> <51F0F855.30305@gmx.at> <20130726225246.39480a2e@anarchist> In-Reply-To: <20130726225246.39480a2e@anarchist> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:R+2Bg0On9lr6yJoPf4czPek2V2j6rPC03SWLyZ45UnkaYdnmhgG ktu7kEGk/mZNP7Li6Jd6nOhocpIcxnOU2xKaxpcdVAjryBXNVGG64U0GhvjwOYgS4zBoPd1 wrNCSHq8yrGBmRPMddv3ygl3nLJW8F5DDqCrnGWuOoguAmtO7E61OGOKqSUICg5Zl0Xc0JR XfRibhx0HLy5idw0C6iVQ== X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > Works great, thanks. I've applied this to Ubuntu 13.10's version of Emacs > 24.3. If you feel that no more should be done, please close this bug. Thanks, martin [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.20 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829 Cc: 14829@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > Works great, thanks. I've applied this to Ubuntu 13.10's version of Emacs > 24.3. If you feel that no more should be done, please close this bug. Thanks, martin [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.20 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record > Works great, thanks. I've applied this to Ubuntu 13.10's version of Emacs > 24.3. If you feel that no more should be done, please close this bug. Thanks, martin From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jul 29 12:56:33 2013 Received: (at 14829-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jul 2013 16:56:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56465 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V3qkJ-0003JA-OP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:56:32 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:58356) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V3qkG-0003Im-NS for 14829-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:56:29 -0400 Received: from [62.47.62.165] ([62.47.62.165]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0Lwarz-1U0c3v4AGN-018HAl for <14829-done@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 18:56:22 +0200 Message-ID: <51F69EAD.4040507@gmx.at> Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 18:56:13 +0200 From: martin rudalics MIME-Version: 1.0 To: 14829-done@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#14829: (no subject) References: <20130708170808.555814cb@limelight.wooz.org> <20130711153743.1858db0d@anarchist> <51ED6DC3.6040501@gmx.at> <51EE2C61.8080900@gmx.at> <20130723093825.19f4a2ee@anarchist> <51F0F855.30305@gmx.at> <20130726225246.39480a2e@anarchist> In-Reply-To: <20130726225246.39480a2e@anarchist> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:XtKhXx2oIkemjCzc944qzX2f5kOLj3Ch1z5OSdaRGSPiuBuHjN2 BFt8059JpDX+q2D8VfUL1XSppJjkjihvZAOCZ4WgithuORtrKzOe7d6b60E9gxHITxLJTrf K6Gxpoi3a8FXebWTKR8gI/Kj4qj1b7J172fZv7t1pv28+Umvhno9fe5c21aUSAe4lz40Wh1 X1oL/hzPZ6lpfyQe2uUcg== X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > Works great, thanks. I've applied this to Ubuntu 13.10's version of Emacs > 24.3. Checked in as revision 113542. Bug closed. Thanks, martin [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.22 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14829-done Cc: Barry Warsaw X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > Works great, thanks. I've applied this to Ubuntu 13.10's version of Emacs > 24.3. Checked in as revision 113542. Bug closed. Thanks, martin [...] Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.22 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.0 SLIGHTLY_BAD_SUBJECT Subject contains something slightly spammy 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rudalics[at]gmx.at) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record > Works great, thanks. I've applied this to Ubuntu 13.10's version of Emacs > 24.3. Checked in as revision 113542. Bug closed. Thanks, martin From unknown Sat Jun 21 10:38:34 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 11:24:03 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator