GNU bug report logs - #20677
tooltips generate garbage

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <mituharu <at> math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#20677: closed (tooltips generate garbage)
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 00:51:03 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Fri, 05 Jun 2015 09:50:13 +0900
with message-id <wlk2vj2d2y.wl%mituharu <at> math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp>
and subject line Re: bug#20677: tooltips generate garbage
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #20677,
regarding tooltips generate garbage
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
20677: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20677
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Angelo Graziosi <angelo.graziosi <at> alice.it>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: tooltips generate garbage
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 23:40:33 +0200

After tooltips show up, they do not disappear moving the mouse but leave 
garbage in the Emacs frame.

I see this (on GNU/Linux, GTK build) in recent Emacs master.

This DID NOT happen with the builds I did a few week ago (May 13).

Usually "emacs -Q" is enough to see this issue. It seems a redrawing 
problem because when I click on the upper-right '-' button which reduce 
Emacs to an icon in status bar and then re-enlarging, the garbage 
disappears (but re-appears if the mouse pointer is over an element which 
needs a tooltip).


Ciao,
 Angelo.

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <mituharu <at> math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: michael_heerdegen <at> web.de, 20677-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <mituharu <at> math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp>, angelo.graziosi <at> alice.it
Subject: Re: bug#20677: tooltips generate garbage
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 09:50:13 +0900

>>>>> On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 18:37:51 +0300, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> said:

>> > So which one of them is better, and should be pushed?
>> 
>> Thanks for testing.  The second one is closer to the code before
>> the cairo merge, but the first would be better if it works.

> I agree that the first patch looks better, as x_clear_area1 sounds
> like a helper function.  So I suggest that we push that in a couple
> of days.

I pushed the first patch in dcf18b5.

				     YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
				mituharu <at> math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.