From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/12370 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Minor annoyance with `z' Date: 27 Sep 1997 05:43:45 +0200 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035151918 3418 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 22:11:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 22:11:58 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from xemacs.org (xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu [128.174.252.16]) by altair.xemacs.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA30522 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 1997 22:29:38 -0700 Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA29701 for ; Sat, 27 Sep 1997 00:23:21 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from claymore.vcinet.com (claymore.vcinet.com [208.205.12.23]) by ifi.uio.no with SMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Sat, 27 Sep 1997 06:47:44 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 2408 invoked by uid 504); 27 Sep 1997 04:47:42 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 2405 invoked from network); 27 Sep 1997 04:47:42 -0000 Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@129.240.64.2) by claymore.vcinet.com with SMTP; 27 Sep 1997 04:47:41 -0000 Original-Received: from proletcult.slip.ifi.uio.no (larsi@xyplex35.uio.no [129.240.154.55]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Sat, 27 Sep 1997 06:47:39 +0200 Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by proletcult.slip.ifi.uio.no (8.8.2/8.8.2) id GAA07303; Sat, 27 Sep 1997 06:51:34 +0200 Mail-Copies-To: never Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Stefan Waldherr's message of "26 Sep 1997 13:11:51 -0400" X-Mailer: Quassia Gnus v0.12/Emacs 19.34 X-Face: &w!^oO~dS|}-P0~ge{$c!h\ writes: > Running gnus in frame `A' and suspending it via `z' results in one big frame > with some previous buffer. Quitting gnus via `q' results in the expected > behaviour, that is TWO frames. Is there a reason, why the two behave > differently wrt frames? (You're using the Emacs terms "frame" and "window" in the reverse way that they're supposed to be used.) I'd suggest using two frames instead of two windows in one frame. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen