[Emacs] Fix evaluation issue of `mu4e-headers-visible-columns' eval
This commit fixes a bug introduced in 8c6e622a7c and 69dc8c7d7c where the mu4e-headers view’s width was set to a dynamic, frame-dependant value that could not be computed with Emacs launched as a headless server. This commit makes this value evaluate when the `mu4e-headers' mode is activated, and hence it should get the correct width of the current frame.
This commit is contained in:
		
							parent
							
								
									3164af60cc
								
							
						
					
					
						commit
						988596a904
					
				| @ -3224,12 +3224,16 @@ | ||||
|    On modern-day  computers, with  wide screens almost  everywhere, there  is no | ||||
|    reason for the email buffer to open  below the email directory and not on its | ||||
|    right,  which  is  why I  set  the  split  view  to be  vertical  instead  of | ||||
|    horizontal. And to make it more readable, the header window will only occupy | ||||
|    40% of Emacs’ frame, the rest will be given to emails. | ||||
|    horizontal. And to make it more  readable, the header window will only occupy | ||||
|    40% of Emacs’  frame, the rest will be  given to emails. As you  can see, the | ||||
|    width of the mu4e headers is evaluated each time we enter it, so it can react | ||||
|    to the frame being potentially not the same width than earlier. | ||||
|    #+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp | ||||
|      (setq mu4e-split-view 'vertical | ||||
|            mu4e-headers-visible-columns (round (* (frame-total-cols) | ||||
|                                                   0.4))) | ||||
|      (setq mu4e-split-view 'vertical) | ||||
|      (add-hook 'mu4e-headers-mode-hook | ||||
|                (lambda () | ||||
|                  (setq mu4e-headers-visible-columns (round (* (frame-total-cols) | ||||
|                                                               0.4))))) | ||||
|    #+END_SRC | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|    This  is the  setup I  have for  my  SMTP mail  server: I  point Emacs’  SMTP | ||||
|  | ||||
		Loading…
	
	
			
			x
			
			
		
	
		Reference in New Issue
	
	Block a user