From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: Re: emacs misbehaves without --unibyte Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 09:23:11 +0300 (IDT) Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <20020529001818.GA428459@bruegel.RZ.TU-Ilmenau.DE> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1022653609 17953 127.0.0.1 (29 May 2002 06:26:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 06:26:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17Cwv3-0004fS-00 for ; Wed, 29 May 2002 08:26:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17Cwvl-00035N-00; Wed, 29 May 2002 02:27:33 -0400 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17Cwts-0002xX-00 for ; Wed, 29 May 2002 02:25:36 -0400 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA27834; Wed, 29 May 2002 09:23:11 +0300 (IDT) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Paul Stoeber In-Reply-To: <20020529001818.GA428459@bruegel.RZ.TU-Ilmenau.DE> Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:1661 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs:1661 On Wed, 29 May 2002, Paul Stoeber wrote: > (How is Emacs not a binary file editor when it has hexl mode?) It's not a binary file editor if you are in a mode other than hexl. > I started this thread because default emacs wouldn't let me navigate > filesystems that contain funny filenames, so the "8-bit cleanness" > discussion only applies to file name handling (although I had also > mentioned "text/binary files" in a general statement). For that, Miles gave the solution: you should set up your language environment correctly, or set file-name-coding-system explicitly. I replied in addition to what Miles said, thinking that you really meant 8-bit cleanliness throughout. > Is it reasonable > for Emacs to refuse to open existing files and to invent new file names > in place of existing ones? No. But the ``reasonable'' thing is hard to implement without hints from the user's environment. Please remember that Emacs decides where a file name starts and ends in the Dired buffer by using a set of convoluted regexps designed to parse the "ls -la" output for file's name, date, time, attributes, etc. A stray 8-bit byte can cause spurious wrong matches of those regexps, and the net effect is what you reported.