From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#9361: 24.0.50; default value of `dired-do-chmod' Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 07:42:52 -0800 Message-ID: References: <03BC028E352D4173B985B3B34DF3193A@us.oracle.com><87zkiyabea.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <1BDADB23B4434E0C9330F1B010F1E1CE@us.oracle.com><88378BBDA1F142B6A8CFF3961B3DEDDF@us.oracle.com> <87obtpd2uv.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1327679026 30945 80.91.229.12 (27 Jan 2012 15:43:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:43:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 9361@debbugs.gnu.org To: "'Chong Yidong'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 27 16:43:37 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Rqnxf-000526-2o for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:43:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42697 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rqnxe-0005SZ-EQ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:43:34 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:51538) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RqnxY-0005SB-0P for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:43:32 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RqnxU-0006u5-2t for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:43:27 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:41529) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RqnxU-0006tv-1N for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:43:24 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Rqny5-0005k7-QO for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:44:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:44:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 9361 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: notabug Original-Received: via spool by 9361-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B9361.132767902822048 (code B ref 9361); Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:44:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9361) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jan 2012 15:43:48 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46916 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Rqnxs-0005jY-FJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:43:48 -0500 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]:54273) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Rqnxo-0005jK-E8 for 9361@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:43:45 -0500 Original-Received: from acsinet22.oracle.com (acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.4) with ESMTP id q0RFgvNC007254 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:42:58 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by acsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q0RFgvWh024907 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:42:57 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt120.oracle.com (abhmt120.oracle.com [141.146.116.72]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q0RFguKm020489; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:42:56 -0600 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.35.238) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 07:42:56 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <87obtpd2uv.fsf@gnu.org> Thread-Index: AczcxM24vOUY0qWSRxWCpXc8wLyf8QAPidDA X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Source-IP: acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A020208.4F22C603.00CD,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:56085 Archived-At: > > This bug has not at all been fixed - AFAICT, everything I > > reported is still a problem. It should not have been closed. > > You apparently fixed your own choice of a problem, which > > was not the problem that was reported. > > > > The default value of `dired-do-chmod' is still the same, > > inappropriate value. There is no reason to pick up the > > permissions from the _first_ of the marked files - makes > > no sense at all. And it is still not made clear to users > > which file the permissions are being copied from. Please > > read the bug report, and the followup passage cited below. > > Your suggestion in the original post was > > >> The best approach is not to provide any default value here. You read what you want to read, apparently. Which part of the above text about our currently having an unclear, inappropriate default value did you not understand? Nothing has changed wrt the default value, except the treatment of empty input. > As Juri noted, if you don't want the suggested value, just don't type > M-n. Since this command no longer accepts empty input as a > permission, there is nothing else to fix. See above - there is plenty to fix. We should either provide no default value or provide one that makes sense. That's the bug that was reported. I made pretty clear what the problem was, even quoting the description more than once. Here goes again: >>> The point is that if we are going to copy settings from a >>> particular file in order to make them available for, >>> essentially, pasting operations to other files, then the >>> target file being copied from should be clear. The copy >>> operation should be an explicit user choice, not something >>> implicit, based only on the first marked file (why not the >>> last? or the 23rd?). > > Do I need to open a new bug and copy the 9361 report to it, > > i.e., to start over? Apparently so. #10624