From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Leo Liu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#22338: 25.0.50; deactivate-mark regression Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2016 19:02:08 +0800 Message-ID: References: <8337tyextd.fsf@gnu.org> <83y4bi9ap3.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1454324705 32174 80.91.229.3 (1 Feb 2016 11:05:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 11:05:05 +0000 (UTC) To: 22338@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 01 12:04:53 2016 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 1aQCHs-0008WQ-Ne for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 12:04:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51781 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCHs-00058k-3x for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:04:52 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37133) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCHT-00056R-2M for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:04:48 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCH5-0004cX-1n for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:04:26 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:55743) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCH4-0004cI-VE for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:04:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCH4-0002js-NS for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:04:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org In-Reply-To: Resent-From: Leo Liu Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2016 11:04:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 22338 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.145432459410470 (code B ref -1); Mon, 01 Feb 2016 11:04:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Feb 2016 11:03:14 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43963 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCGI-0002io-Ib for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:03:14 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43414) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCGG-0002ib-Nw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:03:13 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCFr-00037x-Rh for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:03:07 -0500 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:37392) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCFr-00035W-PA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:02:47 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:32931) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCFZ-0003ku-Uv for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:02:43 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCFO-0002P7-Ec for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:02:29 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:47497) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCFO-0002OU-88 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:02:18 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aQCFM-0004um-AE for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 12:02:16 +0100 Original-Received: from 116.213.171.151 ([116.213.171.151]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 12:02:16 +0100 Original-Received: from sdl.web by 116.213.171.151 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 12:02:16 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 25 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 116.213.171.151 Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAACgAAAAoBAMAAAB+0KVeAAAAElBMVEUAAAAAAP+LRRP0pGC+ vr7///+7mT1iAAAAAWJLR0QAiAUdSAAAAAlwSFlzAAALEwAACxMBAJqcGAAAAAd0SU1FB9cBBwMO DhglKe4AAAEsSURBVCjPbZNBboQwDEV/Cd4X9QJRThApmn0XYW+Jyf2v0m+HhqDBgiAe9rcTG7QH w/1Vn2Ar8gBb/ocywSN3qK9T3z4eFDB4eApocBpeBs1RSykoJd8gQcm8pGmHXFso3ajnmsqV0TnY DQkOfXUfN5NwaI7AWTVOyEhcu1aHmdWItHddUVUcUgUBCkitu8V6ditHVOVdqzl2EQ1ZVGTbdK0V 7cqn8vWzoU5Q/bF9Y/Y0cRU1xwkys5dJ+Dt6pBDWifcNQml8Gh2JVmPSoQzo7en0grswkxrUGYJ7 0hSxxAGr7ZMwYcHIzprpi7TENEE1xtiYxixRlCfPBsUUrwHD7uGIwATrbnODJcVrPpVn3hxiGloe m/S+z3CtuzUSMo83N4DPH+F0evwR3P4A2k+75838OKQAAAAASUVORK5CYII= User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.90 (OS X 10.11.3) Cancel-Lock: sha1:RYArH9ElfSCouDa65QRQV52tcmw= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:112198 Archived-At: On 2016-01-21 18:08 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Would you mind showing a more detailed recipe, including the file you > used and the exact procedure to change the file behind Emacs's back? > Also, how do you check that the mark is still active after the revert? > I feel there are some fine details that are different between our > attempts to reproduce the issue, because I cannot reproduce it no > matter what I do. There's some factor here that I don't get. I hope > it's not some stupid oversight on my part. I am now using GNU Emacs 25.0.90 built on 2016-01-31 and the problem seems getting better. My current observation is this (revert-buffer nil t t) only keeps the active mark if the file has not changed at all but deactivates it otherwise. I modified the file by appending a line to it using shell command. > Well, if we are talking about users, why would a user invoke > revert-buffer in such a strange way? And if the region is active, but > not highlighted, doesn't "C-x C-x" show it highlighted? Obviously not directly. It can be part of a hook. For example I am using a package to refactor erlang which writes to disk and send emacs the list of files that may have changed. HTH, Leo