Word-wrap breaks in windows with small width

Bug #1725792 reported by Sirap on 2017-10-21
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
gedit (Ubuntu)

Bug Description

When making a window as narrow as possible, I noticed that word-wrap stopped wrapping words before I was done shrinking the window (attached screenshots 1 and 2).

By chance I stumbled upon the cause: I tried disabling the sidebar in settings, but accidentally disabled the status bar instead, and suddenly the word-wrap worked immediately:

The status bar minimum width is clamping text area/word-wrap width to a larger value than the editor area's actual width. (screenshot 3)

I expect the status bar to never interfere with, or cause, the need for horizontal scrolling -- especially when word-wrap exists for the sole purpose of removing horizontal scrolling. I expect the status bar to make due with whatever size it is given.


(That I tried to find the sidebar settings in 1. the application menu, and 2. the settings panel before finally finding it in 3. an inconspicuous accessory menu in the window's title bar speaks loads about the current design, but is, of course, a separate issue that I don't know how to even begin to address)


Description: Ubuntu 17.10
Release: 17.10

  Installed: 3.22.1-1ubuntu1
  Candidate: 3.22.1-1ubuntu1
  Version table:
 *** 3.22.1-1ubuntu1 500
        500 http://se.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu artful/main amd64 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

Sirap (sirap) wrote :
Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. The issue you are reporting is an upstream one and it would be nice if somebody having it could send the bug to the developers of the software by following the instructions at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Upstream/GNOME. If you have done so, please tell us the number of the upstream bug (or the link), so we can add a bugwatch that will inform us about its status. Thanks in advance.

Changed in gedit (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → Low
Sirap (sirap) wrote :

So...what does that mean? That unless someone else comes along with the same problem my report will never reach the right people?

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

no, that the problem is not Ubuntu specific and that Ubuntu has no dedicated gedit maintainer so you would increase your chances to have the issue looked at to report it to the people who write the software as well

Sirap (sirap) wrote :

Thank you for your reply. Although you did start with a "no" it still sounds to me as if the report doesn't reach the right people. Could you clarify the process of how it will do that anyway?

The reason I want to know of course being that if it doesn't, that fact will greatly impact my willingness to report bugs in the future. From what you said I feel that they won't be looked at, nor forwarded, which means there's no point for me to report them.

Sirap (sirap) wrote :

Considering that there seems to be no process by which my report will reach the right people, I will unfortunately have to conclude that reporting bugs here is a waste of time. Will not continue.

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

There is a process, bugs triagers do send some of the issues upstream but there are not enough manpower to deal with all the reports so it might takes time.

If you send it upstream it would help and increase the chances that the people writting the software read about the issue but if you are not interested that's fine as well.

Note that your issue has been looked at, otherwise you wouldn't have got a reply, it's just not important enough to make it to the top of your list and have somebody assigned to work on it.

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

top of our list

Sirap (sirap) wrote :

Thank you for your reply Sebastien.

As long as there's a process, that's fine. Whether it gets classified as won't-fix or something else is also fine.

The bigger picture is that if I get the impression that I reported a bug in the "wrong" bug tracker even after going through multiple wiki pages (and CL tools) just to make sure how to do it right, it would undermine the whole bug reporting process. At least in my mind.

I'll consider your suggestion.

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

I can understand that the bug reporting experience can be frustrating, it's not ideal for sure. We recommend reporting to launchpad because we want to know about the issues we have on Ubuntu and some of the issues have to do with Ubuntu specific changes.

In an ideal world we would be able to deal with all the feedback, but in practice we don't have the manpower for that. We review the bugslists and try to surface important issues and work on those, which means a lot of the less-critical reports just end up "sitting there". When it looks like the issue is an upstream one and not important enough for us to work on it then I tend to recommend the submitter to try to send it upstream to increase the chances to have it looked at by somebody.

Anyway you should have an idea now why things are the way they are at least

Paul White (paulw2u) wrote :


We are sorry that we do not always have the capacity to review all reported bugs in a timely manner. You reported this bug some time ago and Ubuntu 17.10 (artful) reached end-of-life on July 19, 2018.

Do you still see a problem related to the one that you reported in a currently supported version of Ubuntu? I'm asking as I cannot reproduce the issue with gedit 3.28 in Ubuntu 18.04.

Thank you for helping make Ubuntu better.

Paul White
[Ubuntu Bug Squad]

Changed in gedit (Ubuntu):
status: New → Incomplete
Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

[Expired for gedit (Ubuntu) because there has been no activity for 60 days.]

Changed in gedit (Ubuntu):
status: Incomplete → Expired
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers