Re: Proposing changes to adjust_frame_size

[Garjola Dindi]

On Sun 09-May-2021 at 10:41:00 +02, martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>
wrote: 
>>> But thhis last ConfigureNotify event is not explicable to me, values
>>> like 789x845 are unprecedented so far.  Does your WM deliberately
>>> resize the frame?
>>
>> Yes, pretty much like Emacs splits windows into two balanced halves.  I
>> have a 1600 pixel wide screen, 3 pixels gap between WM windows, and 3
>> pixel window borders.  That makes 1579 pixels width for actual WM
>> windows, divided by two (I've had a terminal at the left and emacs at
>> the right), makes 789.5 pixels per window.
>
> Elementary.  But why should it react so allergically to our resize
> request?  Basically, we have no choice: For some "normal" WMs we have to
> tell them the size we want when the frame is mapped because before that
> they may ignore our resize requests and after that the frame has already
> appeared with its wrong size.  For a tiling WM requesting a size when
> the frame is mapped is apparently a mortal sin.
>
> Whatever it be, I attach a patch to address this issue.  It basically
> means that on a tiling WM you cannot start with an iconic frame (but
> doing so should not make sense anyway).  If people still want to do
> that, we probably need a customizable variable where users tell Emacs
> what kind of WM they use.
>
> martin
>
>


Hi,

I have been following this issue since commit
30d974bf5c02a1367291fbb6fa17a182bb7974b7 breaks EXWM (the Emacs X WM),
since the first operation is resizing the frame to full screen.

>From this last message I understand that the issue is not going to be
addressed, which means that EXWM users can't use Emacs master branch.

Is my interpretation correct?

Thanks.

Garjola

>
>
>

--