From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Kangas Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#34338: 26.1; delete-file return codes and failures Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 13:48:37 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20190205214737.vswyk7sfmgkliv7v@E15-2016.optimum.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000032fd40059478de7d" Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="117054"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: 34338@debbugs.gnu.org To: Boruch Baum Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 09 19:38:13 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iIFue-000UHP-6K for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 19:38:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53166 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iIFuc-0004Xk-E8 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 13:38:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36552) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iIASl-0001ZU-Fz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 07:49:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iIASk-0005XO-D5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 07:49:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:43413) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iIASk-0005XK-Ah for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 07:49:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iIASk-0000tK-71 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 07:49:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20190205214737.vswyk7sfmgkliv7v@E15-2016.optimum.net> Resent-From: Stefan Kangas Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 11:49:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 34338 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 34338-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B34338.15706217363415 (code B ref 34338); Wed, 09 Oct 2019 11:49:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 34338) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Oct 2019 11:48:56 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52234 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iIASd-0000t1-Sa for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 07:48:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pf1-f178.google.com ([209.85.210.178]:40170) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iIASc-0000sn-79 for 34338@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 07:48:54 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pf1-f178.google.com with SMTP id x127so1465531pfb.7 for <34338@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 04:48:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=IMW26mDeC+g2s7UZc1gjUSOrbaI1c0W+bMNmxd2+7tM=; b=YEoQCTlDnZPLCXaDYSzAQTdR4PY8ZB05T43DtmaV5oUez1qWnEbgC2cwQfJ4j3/Ry/ 7LrAXQMb9Dz1ba/qZx3zfnzXBASN62rqXOo2w2efukMHgYnjETj4MP/gem3qEF6l1Vh+ 35zSACJpYkYdGT64zkmHBuTkv0KTQKPgY/rzL1DL2uRtINFV23udX5n7vyYw+Y0m0lTv 3xdx0fm6jyJNcB1pVJb6pHm1or52WH1iMP/iP1MUFe4DMjzzvE6rhmpsFSSMWh+2cgmc iKrSAJAW4BeCRKLBJtLjwnF9k1gZj7t3cqzrY63oBvuQUR7qW2q3HcFXUtUG4AhReJz5 X+Ag== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXfpP4e+Ukiw/liWoOiYQM3hyAmvZSHSTJ2Ete4lVcTq6Vsvm1T N99wmJUU18oRLBd2zdTAgbNS9TemE/+AGe5ALlU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqygXylw2lBMtUtxKpVmTJRZ/YvNdR3NTMuYwBIrR5OsTIFnNNDfWOlhNLTTJkSmRIfBGAHc3JDMo7pbrJ5ZUtg= X-Received: by 2002:a62:1bd3:: with SMTP id b202mr3321233pfb.50.1570621728421; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 04:48:48 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:168732 Archived-At: --00000000000032fd40059478de7d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Boruch Baum writes: > On 2019-02-07 05:36, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> > Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 16:02:11 -0500 >> > From: Boruch Baum >> > >> > So the messages are unique, but not clear. >> >> The description comes from the error code returned by a C library >> function. Doing more than that would mean additional checks, which >> will be expensive and probably non-portable. I don't see the benefit. >> I mean, why isn't "Operation not permitted" enough, it tells you that >> your user is not permitted to do that, which is clear enough IMO. > > Reasonable. It seems to me from the discussion like we don't want to make the proposed change, since it has an unclear benefit and is backwards incompatible. Is there is something I'm missing here? Otherwise, I think we can close this as wontfix. Best regards, Stefan Kangas --00000000000032fd40059478de7d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Boruch Baum <bor= uch_baum@gmx.com> writes:

> On 2019-02-07 05:36, Eli Zaret= skii wrote:
>> > Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 16:02:11 -0500
>&g= t; > From: Boruch Baum <boruch= _baum@gmx.com>
>> >
>> > So the messages are= unique, but not clear.
>>
>> The description comes from = the error code returned by a C library
>> function.=C2=A0 Doing mo= re than that would mean additional checks, which
>> will be expens= ive and probably non-portable.=C2=A0 I don't see the benefit.
>&g= t; I mean, why isn't "Operation not permitted" enough, it tel= ls you that
>> your user is not permitted to do that, which is cle= ar enough IMO.
>
> Reasonable.

It seems to me from the d= iscussion like we don't want to make the proposed change, since it has = an unclear benefit and is backwards
incompatible.

Is there is som= ething I'm missing here?=C2=A0 Otherwise, I think we can close this as = wontfix.

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas
--00000000000032fd40059478de7d--