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: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 09:36:59 +0800 Message-ID: References: <8337tyextd.fsf@gnu.org> <83y4bi9ap3.fsf@gnu.org> <834mds1c52.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1454377103 24313 80.91.229.3 (2 Feb 2016 01:38:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 01:38:23 +0000 (UTC) To: 22338@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 02 02:38:11 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 1aQPuz-0003xT-Vl for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2016 02:38:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54721 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPuz-0003yX-80 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:38:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38243) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPuv-0003xp-OU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:38:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPus-0005u3-IT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:38:05 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:46892) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPus-0005tz-FO for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:38:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPus-0003Wb-BK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:38:02 -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: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 01:38:02 +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.145437704313499 (code B ref -1); Tue, 02 Feb 2016 01:38:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Feb 2016 01:37:23 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55480 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPuF-0003Vf-KB for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:37:23 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:46993) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPuD-0003VQ-Gb for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:37:22 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPu7-0005hY-NX for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:37:16 -0500 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:58388) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPu7-0005hU-KC for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:37:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37964) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPu6-0003pB-Qc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:37:15 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPu3-0005hG-89 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:37:14 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:48165) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPu3-0005hC-1Q for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:37:11 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aQPty-0002N4-5i for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2016 02:37:06 +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 ; Tue, 02 Feb 2016 02:37:06 +0100 Original-Received: from sdl.web by 116.213.171.151 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 02 Feb 2016 02:37:06 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 12 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 116.213.171.151 Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAACgAAAAoBAMAAAB+0KVeAAAAG1BMVEUAAAA9Cgm3Hx1WWFWA gn+WmJWsrqv4+vcCAwCRl2MkAAAAAXRSTlMAQObYZgAAAAFiS0dEAIgFHUgAAAAJcEhZcwAAAYoA AAGKATOXMFgAAAAHdElNRQfXAQwDNR+ZJmElAAABIklEQVQoz22SPW+DQAyGWUq65qasd9PNUSX4 AZHK2C1rJy5jpDS4IwRVup9dn7GNafpKIPPgzztXFSujqq1eM2n8h22oMkvxI/i9C97kRfMRUN55 dS3BrsAwBXUtMLAO4lryh8kTjOxKpQNniNxAgZOEe4bZwsDTFhKdqZRLNII4OQNHhEuq/RMkm6Cj TnnEA/fk0BorcYn5qA3oaeAxbaBOLrX+9G48NZ2Fzc2tzDM8Q+tMypEOqYHh8mAWaaK3U/cDMOT5 aMZMABgPXc7zPMs1A8DXO756GFJ/4fMEq47hTsAdn5avoxZ4ywl0c2w4Flu2Ybeyb3S+EqxX2DYA H8veJGEDTnHnrXvRaPyt+2kSfK6rfBZ2tUtfP/mR+pR6sX8BUZ/cDV7tvkoAAAAASUVORK5CYII= User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.90 (OS X 10.11.3) Cancel-Lock: sha1:8A9OeEN28KQ/v8FSe+O8ebitqZY= 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:112241 Archived-At: On 2016-02-01 21:08 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > This is exactly what I did, and your observations now match mine. > > Do you still think the mark should be deactivated in that single case, > or can we conclude that the problem is no longer significant and close > this bug? > > Thanks. Yes I think that's the right thing to do. Will close it in a few days. Thanks, Leo.