From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#16818: Acknowledgement (Undo in region after markers in undo history relocated) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:28:59 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1395711016 24805 80.91.229.3 (25 Mar 2014 01:30:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 01:30:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 16818@debbugs.gnu.org, toby-undo-tree@dr-qubit.org To: Barry OReilly Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 25 02:30:25 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WSGC8-0002uD-Kz for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 02:30:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39188 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSGC8-0005hZ-5R for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:30:24 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39214) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSGBw-0005ZI-QM for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:30:20 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSGBp-00004w-Gq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:30:12 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:47060) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSGBp-0008W6-E0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:30:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WSGBo-0001ib-My for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:30:04 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 01:30:04 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 16818 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 16818-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B16818.13957109446496 (code B ref 16818); Tue, 25 Mar 2014 01:30:04 +0000 Original-Received: (at 16818) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Mar 2014 01:29:04 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48242 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WSGAq-0001gh-0a for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:29:04 -0400 Original-Received: from chene.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.20]:53232) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WSGAn-0001gK-Lx for 16818@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:29:02 -0400 Original-Received: from pastel.home (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by chene.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id s2P1TIjE012732; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:29:18 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id D9DD1600AF; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:28:59 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Barry OReilly's message of "Mon, 24 Mar 2014 18:10:30 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV4891=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9362 : core <4891> : inlines <642> : streams <1144126> : uri <1708957> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x 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:87340 Archived-At: >> Begs the question: why didn't (don't) we record marker adjustments >> here (and other similar places)? > I considered pursuing that question earlier, but opted for those > callers to behave as before, at least for now. Yes, it's definitely not for `emacs-24' in any case. > I've attached the updated patch with your comments incorporated. I'll > install soon. Thank you, Stefan