From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tino Calancha Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#25642: 26.0.50; Save unmodified buffers not visiting a file yet Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 02:22:19 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: References: <87mvdyt7o5.fsf@calancha-pc> <83shnq569a.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1486488190 8217 195.159.176.226 (7 Feb 2017 17:23:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 17:23:10 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) Cc: 25642@debbugs.gnu.org, Tino Calancha To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 07 18:23:06 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Tt-0001wg-Sx for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 18:23:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55596 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Tz-000237-IL for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:23:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43923) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Ts-000201-Fi for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:23:05 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Tp-0004x9-TZ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:23:04 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:32789) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Tp-0004x5-Pm for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:23:01 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Tp-0004hD-KB for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:23:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Tino Calancha Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 17:23:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 25642 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 25642-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B25642.148648815018003 (code B ref 25642); Tue, 07 Feb 2017 17:23:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 25642) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2017 17:22:30 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59221 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9TK-0004gJ-0h for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:22:30 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pg0-f49.google.com ([74.125.83.49]:35188) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9TI-0004g5-1x for 25642@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:22:28 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pg0-f49.google.com with SMTP id 194so40393639pgd.2 for <25642@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 09:22:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references :user-agent:mime-version; bh=wNqhXga2ZQC6beY0Hhr+jE7IPLPX8Ks9/O/2QKlW/as=; b=D4v3u/3MvEibBPcCzhTjRXQjtrzpSJDUkuAPR1XVJv6PhVAutQm/UoaFZ4/dT72k7q 3IDhi0/kYxEji7xtIxw8IsaD/noekWgCIoXTxdY+mwcrkk/0OxBd6hcyNWMhqOd6AzMK XE+VgkvQChw4AFXOziH+Bzj3JRnXNCns7QfKrw92VYzsVHqqgSJJQEfExkdreIqFkGrt H0FkUItefeuKTFu8uzpg/Mg8soHieNbBzOkOrGwISPkZ1y6qC7Ch3vYwpDWeN8nE+Dn0 gamq/sckjkhBodJ8y9uGR2uP/2KA1DEVKGeC1iUgfdlVrWlrc4j6b8vv2OhdJT1B7Pkf XoPg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=wNqhXga2ZQC6beY0Hhr+jE7IPLPX8Ks9/O/2QKlW/as=; b=cgQsTOtmc92/VhNc1IIcmtqOmPkt8MwxkmQEnjHLcsEH9rij6EsEswNOQuKvo9gMlc 0lmLAjdOTdVpxKpTIAeHyw+690GXyv1KnJDVeSSN1Caui3K+l98UI5+4IJOWNAApJ9uC GViwItRwytTGMpGQjNsngngoITX/9mNeAK8oeIaMlGiaCiodP27E+oYVpRDSlugp204g P41TUV81ajfSbrRMw81FmPlmBqBskQWUIPEPaYrEnNK0RyxoOrUyV3I+fcGft9A5GXoC SEja+KEfLaEy4AfK0WewK/8bQ6AKAoU7NKHK6bXX+rjPMB6QrwmnE4qZaiU7irWBLm8y tFwg== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIti4rwReXdMU+WSEYa9iEJTh1+rdVKfoVcqcNw1/O2352zu0m+IQ2oA39QlKZeZw== X-Received: by 10.99.163.109 with SMTP id v45mr21215518pgn.39.1486488142001; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 09:22:22 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from calancha-pc (104.81.147.124.dy.bbexcite.jp. [124.147.81.104]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c64sm13027877pfa.45.2017.02.07.09.22.20 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 07 Feb 2017 09:22:21 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Original-From: Tino Calancha X-X-Sender: calancha@calancha-pc In-Reply-To: <83shnq569a.fsf@gnu.org> 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: 208.118.235.43 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:129087 Archived-At: On Tue, 7 Feb 2017, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Subject: [PATCH] Save unmodified buffers not visiting a file yet >> >> * lisp/files.el (save-buffer): Set modified flag non-nil before >> 'basic-save-buffer' call (Bug#25642). > > Please don't, at least not unconditionally. I use this feature all > the time, e.g. when composing email messages. OK. > > I don't actually understand why this would be a problem: the user > explicitly wanted to reset the modified status of a buffer, why should > Emacs second-guess what the user meant? But if there are some use > cases where you find this annoying (please describe them), let's make > this an optional behavior, off by default. No i don't have in mind cases where i have being annoying but that. Setting modified flag nil followed to trying to save the buffer sounds like the user don't want to save the buffer. I think we can close this bug report. Thanks.