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

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

[debbugs-tracker] bug#20677: closed (tooltips generate garbage)


From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: [debbugs-tracker] bug#20677: closed (tooltips generate garbage)
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 00:51:03 +0000

Your message dated Fri, 05 Jun 2015 09:50:13 +0900
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#20677: tooltips generate garbage
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #20677,
regarding tooltips generate garbage
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden)


-- 
20677: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20677
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: tooltips generate garbage Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 23:40:33 +0200 User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 After tooltips show up, they do not disappear moving the mouse but leave garbage in the Emacs frame.

I see this (on GNU/Linux, GTK build) in recent Emacs master.

This DID NOT happen with the builds I did a few week ago (May 13).

Usually "emacs -Q" is enough to see this issue. It seems a redrawing problem because when I click on the upper-right '-' button which reduce Emacs to an icon in status bar and then re-enlarging, the garbage disappears (but re-appears if the mouse pointer is over an element which needs a tooltip).


Ciao,
 Angelo.



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: bug#20677: tooltips generate garbage Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 09:50:13 +0900 User-agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.8 (Shijō) APEL/10.6 Emacs/22.3 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)
>>>>> On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 18:37:51 +0300, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> said:

>> > So which one of them is better, and should be pushed?
>> 
>> Thanks for testing.  The second one is closer to the code before
>> the cairo merge, but the first would be better if it works.

> I agree that the first patch looks better, as x_clear_area1 sounds
> like a helper function.  So I suggest that we push that in a couple
> of days.

I pushed the first patch in dcf18b5.

                                     YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
                                address@hidden


--- End Message ---

reply via email to

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