Bug: with option hidestars to be hidden stars are on white backround on block terminal [7.9.2 (release_7.9.2-882-gf47a71 @ /home/grfz/src/org-mode/lisp/)]

Bug: with option hidestars to be hidden stars are on white backround on block terminal [7.9.2 (release_7.9.2-882-gf47a71 @ /home/grfz/src/org-mode/lisp/)]

[Gregor Zattler]

Remember to cover the basics, that is, what you expected to happen and
what in fact did happen.  You don't know how to make a good report?  See

     http://orgmode.org/manual/Feedback.html#Feedback

Your bug report will be posted to the Org-mode mailing list.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear org-developers, Bastien,

I use option `hidestars' and Emacs/org-mode on a terminal with
black background.  Since a few days the superflous stars are not
hidden any more but shown on a white background.  This makes them
stand out very much.  

Test it like this:
emacs-snapshot -Q -nw -l ~/.emacs.d/_minimal.org-init.el

with ~/.emacs.d/_minimal.org-init.el being:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
(add-to-list 'load-path "~/src/org-mode/lisp")
(setq org-modules (quote (org-bbdb org-bibtex org-docview org-gnus org-info org-jsinfo org-inlinetask org-irc org-mew org-mhe org-rmail org-vm org-wl org-w3m)))
(org-reload)
(find-file "/tmp/colortest.org")
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

and /tmp/colortest.org being:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
#+STARTUP: hidestars
* one
** two
*** three
**** four
***** five
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<



This is the first time I used git bisect and the offending commit
seems to bee:


4549f0c99cef65c68879641d2a96ad486b64e6b1 is the first bad commit
commit 4549f0c99cef65c68879641d2a96ad486b64e6b1
Author: Bastien Guerry <bzg@altern.org>
Date:   Mon Dec 24 13:46:36 2012 +0100

    org.el: (org-mode): Use `face-background' instead of `org-find-invisible-foreground'
    
    * org.el (org-find-invisible-foreground): Delete.
    (org-mode): Use `face-background' instead of
    `org-find-invisible-foreground'.
    
    Thanks to Achim for suggesting this.

:040000 040000 6f89fcb4d88786c702467a18c9280325e352082c 3ae33a346e25278f368d8dcf4bfa19428f192607 M      lisp


I'm not able to grok the diff.  I hope somebody is able to fix this.

Thanks for org-mode, gregor


Emacs  : GNU Emacs 24.3.50.1 (i486-pc-linux-gnu, X toolkit, Xaw scroll bars)
 of 2012-12-24 on dex, modified by Debian
Package: Org-mode version 7.9.2 (release_7.9.2-882-gf47a71 @ /home/grfz/src/org-mode/lisp/)

Re: Bug: with option hidestars to be hidden stars are on white backround on block terminal [7.9.2 (release_7.9.2-882-gf47a71 @ /home/grfz/src/org-mode/lisp/)]

[Achim Gratz]

Am 28.12.2012 14:36, schrieb Gregor Zattler:
> I use option `hidestars' and Emacs/org-mode on a terminal with
> black background.  Since a few days the superflous stars are not
> hidden any more but shown on a white background.  This makes them
> stand out very much.

I don't see how this change is related since it changes the foreground, 
not the background.  What do the following things return if you eval 
them in the org buffer (with M-: since they are not interactive):

(face-background 'default nil 'default)
(face-foreground 'default nil 'default)
(face-background 'org-hide nil 'default)
(face-foreground 'org-hide nil 'default)

-- 
Achim.

(on the road :-)

Re: Bug: with option hidestars to be hidden stars are on white backround on block terminal [7.9.2 (release_7.9.2-882-gf47a71 @ /home/grfz/src/org-mode/lisp/)]

[Nicolas Richard]

Achim Gratz <Stromeko@Nexgo.DE> writes:

> Am 28.12.2012 14:36, schrieb Gregor Zattler:
>> I use option `hidestars' and Emacs/org-mode on a terminal with
>> black background.  Since a few days the superflous stars are not
>> hidden any more but shown on a white background.  This makes them
>> stand out very much.
>
> I don't see how this change is related since it changes the
> foreground, not the background.  What do the following things return
> if you eval them in the org buffer (with M-: since they are not
> interactive):

I noticed the same kind of problem (outside org-mode). It turns out
that the special color "unspecified-bg" [1] does not work as expected
when using it as the foreground color : the text is not made invisible
and the aforementioned behaviour occurs.

I guess that a workaround would be to test if "unspecified-bg" is
returned and use nil in that case (which is the old behaviour iiuc).

[1] unspecified-bg is the background value "if the terminal doesn't
allow to query its default colors" (quoted from
<http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs/5823>)

-- 
N.

Re: Bug: with option hidestars to be hidden stars are on white backround on block terminal [7.9.2 (release_7.9.2-882-gf47a71 @ /home/grfz/src/org-mode/lisp/)]

[Achim Gratz]

Am 28.12.2012 16:59, schrieb Nicolas Richard:
> I noticed the same kind of problem (outside org-mode). It turns out
> that the special color "unspecified-bg" [1] does not work as expected
> when using it as the foreground color : the text is not made invisible
> and the aforementioned behaviour occurs.

Thanks, but why is the background color also changing in this case?

> I guess that a workaround would be to test if "unspecified-bg" is
> returned and use nil in that case (which is the old behaviour iiuc).

The original function only made sense if a replacement of 
"unspecified-bg" with "nil" was highly undesirable, so I'd think there 
will be further side-effects from doing this.  I vote for a reversion of 
that patch until this behaviour has been analysed in some detail.  If 
proves still necessary, the implementation of 
"org-find-invisible-foreground" can be further simplified, I'd think.


-- 
Achim.

(on the road :-)

Re: Bug: with option hidestars to be hidden stars are on white backround on block terminal [7.9.2 (release_7.9.2-882-gf47a71 @ /home/grfz/src/org-mode/lisp/)]

[Nicolas Richard]

Achim Gratz <Stromeko@Nexgo.DE> writes:

> Am 28.12.2012 16:59, schrieb Nicolas Richard:
>> I noticed the same kind of problem (outside org-mode). It turns out
>> that the special color "unspecified-bg" [1] does not work as expected
>> when using it as the foreground color : the text is not made invisible
>> and the aforementioned behaviour occurs.
>
> Thanks, but why is the background color also changing in this case?

Sorry, I don't have an answer.

-- 
Nicolas.

Re: Bug: with option hidestars to be hidden stars are on white backround on block terminal [7.9.2 (release_7.9.2-882-gf47a71 @ /home/grfz/src/org-mode/lisp/)]

[Bastien]

Achim Gratz <Stromeko@Nexgo.DE> writes:

> I vote for a reversion of that patch until
> this behaviour has been analysed in some detail.

Done, thanks.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: Bug: with option hidestars to be hidden stars are on white backround on block terminal [7.9.2 (release_7.9.2-882-gf47a71 @ /home/grfz/src/org-mode/lisp/)]

[Gregor Zattler]

Hi Achim, Bastien, org-developers,
* Achim Gratz <Stromeko@Nexgo.DE> [28. Dec. 2012]:
> Am 28.12.2012 14:36, schrieb Gregor Zattler:
>>I use option `hidestars' and Emacs/org-mode on a terminal with
>>black background.  Since a few days the superflous stars are not
>>hidden any more but shown on a white background.  This makes them
>>stand out very much.
> 
> I don't see how this change is related since it changes the
> foreground, not the background.  What do the following things return
> if you eval them in the org buffer (with M-: since they are not
> interactive):

I don't know if it's essential to this tests if the commit in
question is applied or not so I do this two times: 

first line is for 
Org-mode version 7.9.2 (release_7.9.2-890-g9cf680 @ /home/grfz/src/org-mode/lisp/)
(--> patch reverted; stars are hidden)
second line is for
Org-mode version 7.9.2 (release_7.9.2-877-ge6d8ed @ /home/grfz/src/org-mode/lisp/)
(--> with Bastiens patch, stars with white background)
> (face-background 'default nil 'default)
"unspecified-bg"
"unspecified-bg"
> (face-foreground 'default nil 'default)
"unspecified-fg"
"unspecified-fg"
> (face-background 'org-hide nil 'default)
"unspecified-bg"
"unspecified-bg"
> (face-foreground 'org-hide nil 'default)
"black"
"unspecified-bg" (yes: "-bg")

This is on a customised rxvt-unicode with (among others) the
following command line options:  
-tn rxvt-unicode-256color -fg white -bg black
It's the same on uncustomised xterm.

Ciao, Gregor
-- 
 -... --- .-. . -.. ..--.. ...-.-