GNU bug report logs - #27923
24.3; -iconic switch screws up geometry

Previous Next

Full log

Message #26 received at 27923 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Geoff Kuenning <geoff <at> cs.hmc.edu>
To: martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
Cc: 27923 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#27923: 24.3; -iconic switch screws up geometry
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 15:16:07 -0800

(frame-width) and (frame-height) give 80 and 78, respectively. 
And I double-checked that xwininfo indeed says 79x77+100+0.  (This 
is when starting with -Q, --iconic, --geometry, --font, and my 
default resources.)

If I grep all emacs-related resources from my xrdb file and reload 
it, starting with the same command gives the same inconsistency 
between frame-width/height and xwininfo.  Perhaps the width issue 
is because one character space is allocated to the scrollbar?

I also tried removing both emacs-related and font-related 
resources from the RDB, again getting the width/height 
inconsistency.

But just to make sure we're talking about the same thing, in all 
of these cases emacs is coming up with a correct window size after 
I deiconify it.

Hmmm, though...I just discovered that "emacs -Q --iconic" produces 
a different result: it creates an 80x35 frame (79x34 according to 
xwininfo) even when my xrdb contains both an Emacs.geometry of 
80x78+100+0 and a slightly conflicting gnuemacs.geometry of 
80x78+1180+0.  (I have no clue why I have both!)  This implies 
that there's something in my .emacs that's relevant.

I did some binary searching and narrowed it down to a relatively 
small area.  However, in the process I discovered that there must 
be a race, because on a hunch I tried launching twice with no 
change in my .emacs, and once was OK and once produced the narrow 
window.

Anyway, I finally got down to the following two lines:

(menu-bar-mode -1)
(set-default-font (x-get-resource "Font" ""))

With both of those present, I get the absurdly narrow frame.  If I 
remove the first, then I get a frame that's 38x78.  If I leave the 
first and remove the second, I get a teeny frame that's too small 
to type in, but xwininfo reports it as 1x1 (so suppose emacs 
thinks it's 2x2).  And if I remove both, I get a properly sized 
frame.  (This is all with my xrdb restored, BTW.)

But that's not the strangest part.  I cut my .emacs down to JUST 
those
two lines, and things then worked fine.  More testing eventually 
gave me
the following .emacs file (this is 100% of the contents):

(if nil
   (setq load-path (append
                    (mapcar
                     '(lambda (value)
                        (if (and (stringp value)
                                 (not (string-match 
                                 "^/usr/local/" value))
                                 (string-match "^/usr/" value))
                            (replace-match "/usr/local/" t t 
                            value)
                          value))
                      load-path)
                    load-path)))
(menu-bar-mode -1)
(set-default-font (x-get-resource "Font" ""))

Obviously, the first bit of code doesn't get executed.  But if I 
remove
it, launching in iconic mode works!  Having it there makes stuff 
break.

Note that the .emacs above is 532 bytes.  Is there an ancient 
512-byte
buffer somewhere?  I tried replacing the "if nil" part with 512
semicolons, but that didn't produce an error.

Color me confused...


>> FWIW, when I was doing the tests below there was a brief flash 
>> on my
>> screen each time I launched emacs, implying that the window is 
>> first
>> mapped and then unmapped.  I don't know of that's related to 
>> the
>> problem.
>
> Do the flashes occur only when you load init.el or also when 
> using the
> --iconic --geometry 80x78+1180+0 switches only?
>
>>> emacs -Q --iconic --geometry 80x78+1180+0 --font
>>> "-misc-fixed-bold-r-normal-*-15-*-100-100-*-*-ISO8859-1"
>>
>> This works correctly, but the geometry reported by xwininfo is
>> 79x77+100+0 (which is related to my Emacs.geometry Xrdb setting
>> rather than my gnuemacs.geometry).
>
> Do you mean that both sizes are off by one - 80/79 and 78/77 ? 
> What do
>
> M-: (frame-width) RET
>
> and
>
> M-: (frame-height)
>
> in such a frame give?  Did you remove/comment out the resource 
> settings?
> IIRC Emacs combines everything it finds and applies the last 
> settings it
> read.
>
>>> emacs -Q --iconic --load ~/init.el
>>
>> works entirely correctly with the first init.el (including 
>> correct X
>> placement).
>>
>>> emacs -Q --load ~/init.el
>>
>> works entirely correctly with the second init.el.
>
> So apart from the flashes these would be OK?
>
>>> Also, please tell me what
>>> your original scenario gives with the line specifying the font 
>>> setting
>>> removed from the resource file.
>>
>> That one still fails.
>
> "still" in the sense that you get the same bad width?  Does 
> removing the
> font setting change _anything_ in the appearance of the frame?
>
> Thanks, martin
>

-- 
   Geoff Kuenning   geoff <at> cs.hmc.edu 
   http://www.cs.hmc.edu/~geoff/

A programmer who can't write readable prose is as incompetent as 
one
who can't produce working code.

Previous Next

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