From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn?= Bidar via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#68648: 30.0.50; read-only-mode-hook's are not executed when buffer-read-only is t Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 19:58:19 +0200 Message-ID: <34698.1865864777$1706810389@news.gmane.org> References: <86a5ov6h9n.fsf@gnu.org> <868r441pn4.fsf@gnu.org> <86le84z0wz.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn?= Bidar Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31076"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: 68648@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier , stefankangas@gmail.com To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 01 18:59:41 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rVbLg-0007ti-Sj for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2024 18:59:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVbL0-0000zZ-NQ; Thu, 01 Feb 2024 12:58:58 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVbKu-0000yJ-9F for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2024 12:58:52 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVbKt-0001Vc-VZ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2024 12:58:52 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rVbL3-0006QQ-TK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2024 12:59:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn?= Bidar Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 17:59:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 68648 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 68648-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B68648.170681032324671 (code B ref 68648); Thu, 01 Feb 2024 17:59:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 68648) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Feb 2024 17:58:43 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43121 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rVbKl-0006Pr-2c for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2024 12:58:43 -0500 Original-Received: from thaodan.de ([2a03:4000:4f:f15::1]:59234) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rVbKf-0006PV-JF for 68648@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2024 12:58:41 -0500 Original-Received: from odin (dsl-trebng12-50dc77-87.dhcp.inet.fi [80.220.119.87]) by thaodan.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 523C6D03873; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 19:58:20 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=thaodan.de; s=mail; t=1706810300; bh=WrkfIKGvxNbUUhCpvVNSg0bLXfs7KYkh7X9i+5RtwaQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=q2VzfWXf/v9XnvEarc5umrdIb4+5KHGzq/caqg1MsGnrosVPI1b8wYAD48tSP4QJr gzi0D/12x7nF+C99FFJjNvy/WTr6T6j0sF6nHXQEkDxvwnQof6kPCfXTvK9ondNhD2 4O7RSvioNaVOPZUgyAF4qh5LgLDsUvfGROsFM6t74uwQcrNAvkncuSlxa3KxutUuuV 2/6e7d9DD27XxTOcBUxc9dQBNXWO/j+3iU8FNrJ2PGmxfHLr3lrPTFs8gAkYeeGmlc 5cPUVmNAlRJGggq23s7nTSJ9+L1CYvUr/TyQg7MM1fUxZ0M2QWQ3QX8hRv/sSg5aNe mJJfC8qpAC4prYPNuuiF2003HY9/0AZ+RRU5oZt9gPJhHAy18OTG7PtZGj3b7vfwAP Q5HQNWwAuFzHNEt6jSTgMSno8bOA9e62mDNZLkGT7rASouzsHDu/KlQRSX4KHxj5FU 5fRnw3gp7VfNQnIX+Rs0joq+Xo3wI05U5wl9F+htFUvx53+ZYFT/qEWz3om5WuBBxX nJUkllQs3HrbqdqJQwYRQZfbrwc0ykZ1y4gE5vs4BRWbmKe+rg7FvkJDbZiFk03OFW d1DEMjcXOVZR9K28EEYlgge5/Rwn24AgSk33pupFDHmtzSpALDzd8yPoAiFNpegaYe 9Jp/ngIitmqUrcjj/4H40yLM= In-Reply-To: <86le84z0wz.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 01 Feb 2024 16:58:36 +0200") Autocrypt: addr=bjorn.bidar@thaodan.de; prefer-encrypt=nopreference; keydata= mDMEZNfpPhYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdACBEmr+0xwIIHZfIDlZmm7sa+lHHSb0g9FZrN6qE6ru60JUJq w7ZybiBCaWRhciA8Ympvcm4uYmlkYXJAdGhhb2Rhbi5kZT6IlgQTFgoAPgIbAwULCQgHAgIiAgYV CgkICwIEFgIDAQIeBwIXgBYhBFHxdut1RzAepymoq1wbdKFlHF9oBQJk1/YmAhkBAAoJEFwbdKFl HF9oB9cBAJoIIGQKXm4cpap+Flxc/EGnYl0123lcEyzuduqvlDT0AQC3OlFKm/OiqJ8IMTrzJRZ8 phFssTkSrrFXnM2jm5PYDoiTBBMWCgA7FiEEUfF263VHMB6nKairXBt0oWUcX2gFAmTX6T4CGwMF CwkIBwICIgIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgcCF4AACgkQXBt0oWUcX2hbCQEAtru7kvM8hi8zo6z9ux2h K+B5xViKuo7Z8K3IXuK5ugwA+wUfKzomzdBPhfxDsqLcEziGRxoyx0Q3ld9aermBUccHtBxCasO2 cm4gQmlkYXIgPG1lQHRoYW9kYW4uZGU+iJMEExYKADsCGwMFCwkIBwICIgIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwEC HgcCF4AWIQRR8XbrdUcwHqcpqKtcG3ShZRxfaAUCZNf2FQAKCRBcG3ShZRxfaCzSAP4hZ7cSp0YN XYpcjHdsySh2MuBhhoPeLGXs+2kSiqBiOwD/TP8AgPEg/R+SI9GI9on7fBJJ0mp2IT8kZ2rhDOjg gA6IkwQTFgoAOxYhBFHxdut1RzAepymoq1wbdKFlH X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:279302 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Stefan Monnier >> Cc: Stefan Kangas , bjorn.bidar@thaodan.de, >> 68648@debbugs.gnu.org >> Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 09:17:13 -0500 >> >> > Stefan & Stefan, any comments or opinions on this issue? I' debating >> > whether to do anything (and if so, what) about this, or close this bug >> > as wontfix. >> >> [ This a bug of my own making, when I decided to replace >> `toggle-read-only` with`read-only-mode`. ] >> >> I'd be in favor of replacing the `(setq buffer-read-only t)` with >> `(read-only-mode 1)`, but it will require other changes: since calling >> `read-only-mode` will handle `view-read-only`, it might make for a nice >> simplification, but since the code is fairly complex over there, it >> might also make things worse. > > I agree that it would be nice to clean this up, but since it isn't > easy (which I, of course, noticed as well), I'm not sure it is worth > our while, given that the problem is really minor. Thus my doubts and > my question. I think trying to fix the problem if it so minor can take time. However closing it as won't is not a good idea because of the ambiguity of semantics here. It's easy to misunderstanding if you don't know.