From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juri Linkov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#29412: 27.0.50; dired-toggle-read-only should (at some point!) check that the direcory is writeable Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 10:32:53 +0200 Organization: LINKOV.NET Message-ID: <878sa2qfmq.fsf@mail.linkov.net> References: <87o9nt2cvo.fsf@ctlt579.codethink.co.uk> <87y2i35ke7.fsf@gnus.org> <505c79af-0056-4f66-aca8-9559f6ef2bff@default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="27651"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Cc: Robert Marshall , Lars Ingebrigtsen , 29412@debbugs.gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 13 09:52:26 2020 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 1koN7B-00076X-FH for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 09:52:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43376 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1koN7A-0006p9-H9 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 03:52:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40178) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1koN6p-0006ij-4a for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 03:52:03 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:35852) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1koN6o-0001yx-SG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 03:52:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1koN6o-0002jw-R2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 03:52:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Juri Linkov Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 08:52:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 29412 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: fixed Original-Received: via spool by 29412-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B29412.160784949210428 (code B ref 29412); Sun, 13 Dec 2020 08:52:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 29412) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Dec 2020 08:51:32 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47391 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1koN6K-0002i7-07 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 03:51:32 -0500 Original-Received: from relay11.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.178.231]:53869) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1koN6I-0002hg-L3 for 29412@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 03:51:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.gandi.net (m91-129-99-98.cust.tele2.ee [91.129.99.98]) (Authenticated sender: juri@linkov.net) by relay11.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 18339100005; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 08:51:21 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <505c79af-0056-4f66-aca8-9559f6ef2bff@default> (Drew Adams's message of "Sat, 12 Dec 2020 11:26:37 -0800 (PST)") 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:195939 Archived-At: >> I've now made `C-c C-q' signal an error if the directory isn't writable >> in Emacs 28. > > I don't feel strongly about this, but I wonder whether > that's the right thing to do. We do NOT do that for > files, for example. OTOH, displaying a warning might go unnoticed by the user. Then maybe better would be to ask a y-or-n question whether the user still wants to edit the unwritable buffer.