* recover-file warnings too easy to get covered up
@ 2006-02-04 23:24 Dan Jacobson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Dan Jacobson @ 2006-02-04 23:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
The vital minibuffer message
fetchmailrc has auto save data; consider M-x recover-file
gets overwritten before the user has time to notice it, with
Loading sh-script...
Loading easy-mmode...done
Loading sh-script...done
Setting up indent for shell type bash
Loading mule-util...done
setting up indent stuff
Indentation variable are now local.
Indentation setup for shell type bash
if the file contains # -*-Shell-script-*- at top.
Anyway, the user might have not come back from the restroom, so I
would ask him a yes-or-no, and not just hope he saw it.
emacs-version"21.4.1"
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: recover-file warnings too easy to get covered up
[not found] <E1F5vmc-0002uo-6q@fencepost.gnu.org>
@ 2006-02-07 21:51 ` Dan Jacobson
2006-02-08 16:49 ` Kevin Rodgers
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Dan Jacobson @ 2006-02-07 21:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
d> The vital minibuffer message
d> [file] has auto save data; consider M-x recover-file
d> gets overwritten before the user has time to notice it, with
r> What command produces that message?
Simple,
$ emacs x.sh
Type some stuff, then ^Z suspend, kill -1 %1, leaving a #x.sh# file, then
$ emacs x.sh #again, and look at the *Messages* buffer.
You would have to happen to be looking at the minibuffer during the
vital second the "consider M-x recover-file" message is displayed to
see it before it gets covered up. I recall this issue is not new.
So how are you going to make sure the user sees that message before
blithely editing that file? Or is e.g., "Indentation setup for shell type
bash" more important for him to see as he assess the screen once the
smoke clears?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: recover-file warnings too easy to get covered up
2006-02-07 21:51 ` recover-file warnings too easy to get covered up Dan Jacobson
@ 2006-02-08 16:49 ` Kevin Rodgers
2006-02-10 1:12 ` Richard M. Stallman
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Kevin Rodgers @ 2006-02-08 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
Dan Jacobson wrote:
> d> The vital minibuffer message
> d> [file] has auto save data; consider M-x recover-file
> d> gets overwritten before the user has time to notice it, with
>
> r> What command produces that message?
>
> Simple,
> $ emacs x.sh
> Type some stuff, then ^Z suspend, kill -1 %1, leaving a #x.sh# file, then
> $ emacs x.sh #again, and look at the *Messages* buffer.
> You would have to happen to be looking at the minibuffer during the
> vital second the "consider M-x recover-file" message is displayed to
> see it before it gets covered up. I recall this issue is not new.
> So how are you going to make sure the user sees that message before
> blithely editing that file? Or is e.g., "Indentation setup for shell type
> bash" more important for him to see as he assess the screen once the
> smoke clears?
As this cond clause from after-find-file shows, the maintainers clearly
believe that the message is not vital (it is not-serious):
((not buffer-read-only)
(if (and warn
;; No need to warn if buffer is auto-saved
;; under the name of the visited file.
(not (and buffer-file-name
auto-save-visited-file-name))
(file-newer-than-file-p (or buffer-auto-save-file-name
(make-auto-save-file-name))
buffer-file-name))
(format "%s has auto save data; consider M-x recover-this-file"
(file-name-nondirectory buffer-file-name))
(setq not-serious t)
(if error "(New file)" nil)))
--
Kevin Rodgers
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: recover-file warnings too easy to get covered up
2006-02-08 16:49 ` Kevin Rodgers
@ 2006-02-10 1:12 ` Richard M. Stallman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Richard M. Stallman @ 2006-02-10 1:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bug-gnu-emacs
> So how are you going to make sure the user sees that message before
> blithely editing that file? Or is e.g., "Indentation setup for shell type
> bash" more important for him to see as he assess the screen once the
> smoke clears?
As this cond clause from after-find-file shows, the maintainers clearly
believe that the message is not vital (it is not-serious):
It is not "serious" because it does not impede correct visiting of the
file. We could treat it as "serious" if that is clearly better.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-02-10 1:12 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <E1F5vmc-0002uo-6q@fencepost.gnu.org>
2006-02-07 21:51 ` recover-file warnings too easy to get covered up Dan Jacobson
2006-02-08 16:49 ` Kevin Rodgers
2006-02-10 1:12 ` Richard M. Stallman
2006-02-04 23:24 Dan Jacobson
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).