GNU bug report logs - #2588
23.0.90; Man buffer improperly formatted - wrong width

Previous Next

Full log

Message #55 received at 2588 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Chong Yidong <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>
Cc: drew.adams <at> oracle.com, 2588 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#2588: 23.0.90; Man buffer improperly formatted - wrong width
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 22:07:44 +0200

> From: Chong Yidong <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>
> Cc: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>,  2588 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com
> Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 14:43:50 -0500
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> > One thing we could easily do is not set COLUMNS in the environment if
> >> > pop-up-frames is being used,
> >> 
> >> Yes, please do that. Please do not set COLUMNS to the current `frame-width'.
> >
> > Yidong, is this solution fine with you?
> 
> The width of a pop-up frame has, in general, nothing to do with the
> default value of COLUMNS (or the default value that the formatter
> assumes if COLUMNS is omitted).  So I don't see how this is any
> improvement.

It is an "improvement" in the sense that, when pop-up-frames is
non-nil, Emacs 23 will behave like Emacs 20 did.

AFAICS, we started setting COLUMNS in the environment because on some
GNU/Linux system, under X, not setting it would result in over-long
lines.  To avoid that with pop-up-frames, we could set COLUMNS to the
value 80.  For a frame that is not yet created, 80 sounds like a
better default than the width of some other frame/window.

Previous Next

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