[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Should this package be included into the NS port?
|
From: |
Nick Helm |
|
Subject: |
Re: Should this package be included into the NS port? |
|
Date: |
Sat, 19 May 2018 16:29:20 +1200 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (darwin) |
On Tue, 15 May 2018 at 17:19:50 +1200, George Plymale II wrote:
> This package implements a "pseudo-daemon"...
>
> I actually have been using this package constantly for a couple of years
> now and it is a very reliable hack which basically solves this issue.
>
> Thoughts?
I've been using a similar workaround on macOS for a while too. It's
pretty simple - I just advise delete-frame to hide the last frame
instead of closing it. It has the same effect as osx-pseudo-daemon.
IMO, these aren't good solutions though, as they just mask NS's bad
behaviour.
- Re: Should this package be included into the NS port?, (continued)
- Re: Should this package be included into the NS port?, Alan Third, 2018/05/23
- Re: Should this package be included into the NS port?, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/05/24
- Re: Should this package be included into the NS port?, Philipp Stephani, 2018/05/24
- Re: Should this package be included into the NS port?, Philipp Stephani, 2018/05/24
- Re: Should this package be included into the NS port?, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/05/24
Re: Should this package be included into the NS port?, George Plymale II, 2018/05/15
Re: Should this package be included into the NS port?, George Plymale II, 2018/05/17
Re: Should this package be included into the NS port?,
Nick Helm <=
Re: Should this package be included into the NS port?, George Plymale II, 2018/05/29