Subject: RE: bug#9723: 24.0.50; Emacs Clipboard crash

From: Joseph Jones <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 09:08:51 -0800

My thought exactly, but it would be interesting to know why it is trying to set a bad size in the first place. Given my abilities to keep debug sessions running, though, I would vote to go with the defensive fix and correct or abort an invalid resize.

-----Original Message-----
From: martin rudalics [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 3:09 AM
To: Eli Zaretskii
Cc: Joseph Jones; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: bug#9723: 24.0.50; Emacs Clipboard crash

 > According to this, Emacs decided to apply a change in window  > dimensions that was pending from some previous redisplay cycle.  So  > far so good, but look at the new size of the window it tries to set:
 > its newwidth value is -2, a negative number.  This should never  > happen.  (The value -2 is "upgraded" to +2, the minimum "safe" value,  > inside change_frame_size, but 2 is also too small.)

The upgrading happens in check_frame_size and 2 is the minimum width sufficient for the frame's root window.  Why do you think it's too small?

 > The question is now which code requested the change of window width to  > -2, and why.

If you know what the minimum "safe" value is, why not use that?

martin