(display-buffer-other-frame): Eliminate problematic code.

2 files changed, 14 insertions, 3 deletions

diff --git a/lisp/ChangeLog b/lisp/ChangeLog
index 63e7efd6b7c..1eaad1f0061 100644
--- a/lisp/ChangeLog
+++ b/lisp/ChangeLog
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
 2008-03-11  Stefan Monnier  <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
 
+        * files.el (display-buffer-other-frame): Eliminate problematic code.
+
         * menu-bar.el (menu-bar-update-buffers-maxbuf): Remove.
         (menu-bar-select-buffer): Remove.
         (menu-bar-select-frame): Make non-interactive and take a frame arg.
diff --git a/lisp/files.el b/lisp/files.el
index 740bba2764a..a327060dbd0 100644
--- a/lisp/files.el
+++ b/lisp/files.el
@@ -1078,9 +1078,18 @@ documentation for additional customization information."
         (old-window (selected-window))
         new-window)
     (setq new-window (display-buffer buffer t))
-    (lower-frame (window-frame new-window))
-    (make-frame-invisible (window-frame old-window))
-    (make-frame-visible (window-frame old-window))))
+    ;; This may have been here in order to prevent the new frame from hiding
+    ;; the old frame.  But it does more harm than good.
+    ;; Maybe we should call `raise-window' on the old-frame instead?  --Stef
+    ;;(lower-frame (window-frame new-window))
+
+    ;; This may have been here in order to make sure the old-frame gets the
+    ;; focus.  But not only can it cause an annoying flicker, with some
+    ;; window-managers it just makes the window invisible, with no easy
+    ;; way to recover it.  --Stef
+    ;;(make-frame-invisible (window-frame old-window))
+    ;;(make-frame-visible (window-frame old-window))
+    ))
 
 (defvar find-file-default nil
   "Used within `find-file-read-args'.")