bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#5659: 23.1.92; bad toolbar icons, smaller default frame size


From: Drew Adams
Subject: bug#5659: 23.1.92; bad toolbar icons, smaller default frame size
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 10:46:57 -0800

> From: Chong Yidong Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2010 10:20 AM
> > See attached screenshot, which shows the pretest on the 
> > left and the last release, 23.1, on the right.
> > As the screenshot shows:
> >
> > 1. The toolbar icons are without color.
> > 2. The frame size has been reduced (fewer lines).
> 
> (1) is probably due to Lennart compiling without proper image library
> support.  (2) is intentional, see Bug#3643.

Ccing Lennart as an FYI for #1.

The bug #3643 thread is very long; apologies if this is addressed somewhere
there - I didn't find it:

The OP complained about the Emacs 23 frame height, contrasting it with the Emacs
22 case. IIUC, he had no problem with the Emacs 22 size.

So isn't his problem rightfully regarded as a regression wrt Emacs 22?

However, when I use emacs -Q in both Emacs 22.3 and 23.1 the frame sizes are
identical. (I'm using Windows.)

>From what I see, it is only the Emacs 23.2 pretest that has a shorter frame 
>from
both Emacs 22 and 23.1.

My screen resolution is 1280 x 1024 (for both cases).
(I'm using as "pretest": GNU Emacs 23.1.92.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2010-02-20 on LENNART-69DE564).

Why does jidanni see a difference between 22 and 23, and I do not? Is this
platform-dependent? Is it just a resolution difference?

What is wrong with returning to the Emacs 22 appearance, which jidanni confirms
was OK?

I don't really object to the shorter frame, but I don't understand why, if Emacs
22 was OK, we have moved to yet another appearance. Why not just return to what
Emacs 22 did?

Anyway, you can close this bug, I guess. Thx.







reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]