GNU bug report logs -
#64759
Broken faces
Previous Next
Full log
Message #50 received at 64759 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
>> Let's see: when the definition is
>>
>> (defface display-time-date-and-time
>> nil
>> "Face for `display-time-format'."
>> :group 'mode-line-faces
>> :version "30.1")
>>
>> then the customization buffer is
>>
>> Hide display-time-date-and-time face: [sample]
>> State : NO CUSTOMIZATION DATA; not intended to be customized.
>> Face for ‘display-time-format’.
>> -- Empty face --
>> Show All Attributes
>>
>> But when the definition is
>>
>> (defface display-time-date-and-time
>> '((t nil))
>> "Face for `display-time-format'."
>> :group 'mode-line-faces
>> :version "30.1")
>>
>> the customization buffer is
>>
>> Hide display-time-date-and-time face: [sample]
>> State : STANDARD.
>> Face for ‘display-time-format’.
>> -- Empty face --
>> Show All Attributes
>>
>> Looks nice. No strange error message about not intended to be customized.
>
> That's not what I asked. I asked about the face attributes.
>
> IOW, isn't
>
> (defface display-time-date-and-time
> '((t nil))
> "Face for `display-time-format'."
> :group 'mode-line-faces
> :version "30.1")
>
> the same as
>
> (defface display-time-date-and-time
> '((t (:inherit default)))
> "Face for `display-time-format'."
> :group 'mode-line-faces
> :version "30.1")
>
> ?
No, it's not the same. The latter uses a white background on the mode line.
This bug report was last modified 1 year and 321 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.