From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Albinus Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#49261: 28.0.50; File Locking Breaks Presumptuous Toolchains Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2021 13:01:24 +0200 Message-ID: <87r1g7eoor.fsf@gmx.de> References: <87o8bn7bie.fsf@gnus.org> <87zgv6vuon.fsf@gmx.de> <837di9lwbm.fsf@gnu.org> <87a6n5vuu4.fsf@gnus.org> <8735sqnmei.fsf@gnus.org> <87zguyf4ht.fsf@gmx.de> <87pmvum54p.fsf@gnus.org> <87v95mf2lj.fsf@gmx.de> <87pmvt3ob1.fsf@gnus.org> <87fswpgacv.fsf@gmx.de> <87bl7dfikj.fsf@gmx.de> <8735sofuqj.fsf@gmx.de> <83sg0oc83l.fsf@gnu.org> <87v95jevrm.fsf@gmx.de> <83lf6fdav4.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="20344"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: larsi@gnus.org, ncaprisunfan@gmail.com, 49261@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 09 13:02:47 2021 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 1m1oHN-00055Y-FN for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 13:02:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44460 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m1oHM-0007rz-Ed for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 07:02:44 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36226) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m1oGg-0007pm-J0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 07:02:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:46868) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m1oGf-0007tP-RH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 07:02:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m1oGf-0000Rv-Io for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 07:02:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Michael Albinus Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2021 11:02:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 49261 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 49261-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B49261.16258284971696 (code B ref 49261); Fri, 09 Jul 2021 11:02:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 49261) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2021 11:01:37 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58414 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m1oGH-0000RH-Cf for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 07:01:37 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:45251) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m1oGD-0000R0-GS for 49261@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 07:01:34 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1625828486; bh=sK6NumLjhcHSN1E8LEFnSIx/aDTwEB+Abv3hvi0aOJ8=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To; b=DsxqQVzXmVf533KyWQkcRk33kr5FHl1QXkVmUAba33LxCyGD/KlEkjJ2fzXqM0K0j AaLMcXekpa/UYSx8gVRflXX4iq5oHEVgiDymfHmi6GB61B4963ks84RyL3auV4PEky FapxINwhJ8sMc6WYZs6g2XUhv1ndzWSwolbfx5Pc= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Original-Received: from gandalf.gmx.de ([212.91.242.237]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MCbEf-1ltnuv0kYl-009gjg; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 13:01:26 +0200 In-Reply-To: <83lf6fdav4.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 09 Jul 2021 13:45:19 +0300") X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:qgodFoo5k6epEydMWxW5B4kzg0BTHRF+OKYhnHAE9EabhvXqqWv Z6o+cJyuzwDySgNdcT/OAYXPSSQpdNSEtN0SSiKQ3IF9vNQv58Lp6HCrvZpKrAmUXesyvf1 FeuVjBEBhl/u3NCheRB1CqqN3pQWsD7Is6tJiR3agOCn94/ucxB7bBNUFsSQskccVMJJaxQ p/e0PEJVTD+fGcx/H3RNg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:vvChGPeNjC0=:NsSmKFTt2dDrFFx8HWSonr 2PsVukRqsPiKOe2rZ7VWdiCCJBUU4SRlc0GCZFD5MmZokb+iFpA21AEg31WXJqFIcqQwjaOJ7 0WL9JCNvDX+53DysbgifGwF6z/idEYF/jKRbiNaRtDQNTvHCl3vGVvEAxYnPKQugQJY1Ncius afD1be+4iuEdhvZQmOAIyZL4wLYeqwlqaKMsKlD2iouwX+kbgRjQUdFd7wNHlC8n3IqPacrR3 Qy3NjZ7oGyu0EpjF874A9rBRmY1ERIZJWwP3aMDwltqRksQ6tl3ykSqIEiFPlmRH9jagjrylh XOcHFAb2qC1jTrUJDi2MfUDVbzyLC7/ewneTqAgOea7zx/jjsle9xL/NAnsFImnzxCoaq6buk IXkw459IYipPkV4zreMapIWZmE1lpv2hvlqyVV9kN2W2o/0zv8ZcO5nxbSPdarWzgBGR0YtQB GzYMmR29axkBZ3i4yX6eW5CxZFpZuAyQ5m7Z3e9RaZG7bIrMUy2p/DArNbZKCmyfB0vp7ggB0 MY3uYifk3dEy5hvZj3SKdnkx8iLsC5EP8d+RZ+KqAz8nP+qVCuWnDN0xDReuTSWnUKOoP/3pN 1tRD5m6JtUQoMNCgDxKL50adM6ig7bogITRWsieBYLtgRjuyu0zL4kos4WKRBZexIvOowzP/5 fDERg9u7C9aqc9Fr1lEwfYooStg+5ktMPUEQia+4DKPWGgrkp/w+Z1N5W4Eb6RMUDpkKtrpQ2 ukE9zrd5vAiBVmFACKGnjQYnFApEFWLjEN1jpJFXfmfaOTKzZATqMjloeeAAd7uZ66mBkds8 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:209721 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: Hi Eli, >> Remote files (all files which match tramp-file-name-regexp). For >> backward compatibility, and possibly due to performance reasons. > > You want a capability to exempt different kinds of files from locking? > Why would that be a good idea? Performance doesn't cut it, IMO, > because if one wants to be protected from clobbering, one doesn't care > about performance. And if one cares about performance for those > special kinds of files, it most probably means one doesn't care about > file locking at all. > > So I submit that a binary switch is good enough. Until now, there are no file locks for remote files at all. I thought disabling it for remote files would be requested by some users for backward compatibility. > In any case, now that make-lock-file-name is exposed to Lisp, they can > override or advise it to do whatever they like, right? Yes. But they cannot disable it. Advising the function is always possible, but it is less convenient than a user option setting. But well, let's see whether people shout ... Best regards, Michael.