bug#18725: Emacs 24.4. Say "no" to "erase customizations?". .emacs gets written.

bug#18725: Emacs 24.4. Say "no" to "erase customizations?". .emacs gets written.

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hi, Emacs.

In Emacs 24.4, started with a .emacs which includes a customisation for
face show-paren-match, do

M-x customize-group <RET> paren-showing-faces <RET>

.  One of the widgets is "Revert ...".  Hit <RET> on this widget, then 2
for "Erase customizations".  Emacs prompts with "Really erase
customizations? (yes or no)".  Type  "no".

.emacs is then written.  It shouldn't be.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

bug#18725: [PATCH]: Emacs 24.4. Say "no" to "erase customizations?". .emacs gets written.

[Alan Mackenzie]

Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> wrote:
> In Emacs 24.4, started with a .emacs which includes a customisation for
> face show-paren-match, do

> M-x customize-group <RET> paren-showing-faces <RET>

> .  One of the widgets is "Revert ...".  Hit <RET> on this widget, then 2
> for "Erase customizations".  Emacs prompts with "Really erase
> customizations? (yes or no)".  Type  "no".

> .emacs is then written.  It shouldn't be.

Here is a possible patch for the problem:


=== modified file 'lisp/cus-edit.el'
--- lisp/cus-edit.el    2014-06-29 02:33:50 +0000
+++ lisp/cus-edit.el    2014-10-15 10:11:00 +0000
@@ -779,7 +779,8 @@
   "Call function FUN on all widgets in `custom-options'.
 If there is more than one widget, ask user for confirmation using
 the query string QUERY, using `y-or-n-p' if STRONG-QUERY is nil,
-and `yes-or-no-p' otherwise."
+and `yes-or-no-p' otherwise.  Return t if the functionality has
+been executed, nil otherwise."
   (if (or (and (= 1 (length custom-options))
               (memq (widget-type (car custom-options))
                     '(custom-variable custom-face)))
@@ -892,16 +893,17 @@
   ;; Bind these temporarily.
   (let ((custom-reset-standard-variables-list '(t))
        (custom-reset-standard-faces-list '(t)))
-    (custom-command-apply
-     (lambda (widget)
-       (and (or (null (widget-get widget :custom-standard-value))
-               (widget-apply widget :custom-standard-value))
-           (memq (widget-get widget :custom-state)
-                 '(modified set changed saved rogue))
-           (widget-apply widget :custom-mark-to-reset-standard)))
-     "The settings will revert to their default values, in this
+    (if
+       (custom-command-apply
+        (lambda (widget)
+          (and (or (null (widget-get widget :custom-standard-value))
+                   (widget-apply widget :custom-standard-value))
+               (memq (widget-get widget :custom-state)
+                     '(modified set changed saved rogue))
+               (widget-apply widget :custom-mark-to-reset-standard)))
+        "The settings will revert to their default values, in this
 and future sessions.  Really erase customizations? " t)
-    (custom-reset-standard-save-and-update)))
+       (custom-reset-standard-save-and-update))))

 ;;; The Customize Commands


-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

bug#18725: [PATCH]: Emacs 24.4. Say "no" to "erase customizations?". .emacs gets written

[Ivan Shmakov]

>>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

[…]

 > +    (if
 > +       (custom-command-apply
 > +        (lambda (widget)

	Could this please be a ‘when’?

	TIA.

[…]

-- 
FSF associate member #7257  http://boycottsystemd.org/  … 3013 B6A0 230E 334A

bug#18725: [PATCH]: Emacs 24.4. Say "no" to "erase customizations?". .emacs gets written

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Ivan.

Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

> [?]

> > +    (if
> > +       (custom-command-apply
> > +        (lambda (widget)

>        Could this please be a ?when??

It could.  But why?  Any special reason?

>        TIA.

> [?]

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

bug#18725: [PATCH]: Emacs 24.4. Say "no" to "erase customizations?". .emacs gets written.

[Stefan Monnier]

[ How did you end up with gnu-emacs-bug@moderators.isc.org in the "To:"
  field?  ]

> +and `yes-or-no-p' otherwise.  Return t if the functionality has
                                       ^^^
We prefer                            non-nil

Otherwise, looks good, please install,


        Stefan

bug#18725: [PATCH]: Emacs 24.4. Say "no" to "erase customizations?". .emacs gets written.

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Stefan.

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 10:39:48AM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:

> > +and `yes-or-no-p' otherwise.  Return t if the functionality has
>                                        ^^^
> We prefer                            non-nil

> Otherwise, looks good, please install,

Done, with requested amendment, revision #117588.

> [ How did you end up with gnu-emacs-bug@moderators.isc.org in the "To:"
>   field?  ]

This is going to make Glenn unhappy.  I posted it via Usenet, for lack
of getting a CC of my original bug report to which I could've replied.
It seems the bug-gnu-emacs mail server has been reconfigured not to send
CCs to people involved by default, and I'm not subscribed to
bug-gnu-emacs at the moment.

>         Stefan

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

bug#18725: [PATCH]: Emacs 24.4. Say "no" to "erase customizations?". .emacs gets written.

[Glenn Morris]

Stefan Monnier wrote:

> [ How did you end up with gnu-emacs-bug@moderators.isc.org in the "To:"
>   field?  ]

http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=16155#51

> Otherwise, looks good, please install,

Did you mean into emacs-24, because AFAIK this is not a new issue and is
only a minor thing. Are we sure this is safe?

bug#18725: [PATCH]: Emacs 24.4. Say "no" to "erase customizations?". .emacs gets written.

[Glenn Morris]

Alan Mackenzie wrote:

> This is going to make Glenn unhappy.

There's no "going to" about it. I'm aware that you continue to do it.

> for lack of getting a CC of my original bug report to which I could've
> replied.

I checked just now and the automated bug acknowledgment emails are still
going out, just as they always have done, and they still contain
instructions on how to reply. If you did not get one, maybe check into
your email settings.

There's also M-x gnus-read-ephemeral-emacs-bug-group, which is great.

> It seems the bug-gnu-emacs mail server has been reconfigured not to
> send CCs to people involved by default, and I'm not subscribed to
> bug-gnu-emacs at the moment.

There's been no change of configuration on bug-gnu-emacs.
People who report bugs have never been expected to be subscribed to the
list, and never will be.

I've said everything I have to say on this before.

bug#18725: [PATCH]: Emacs 24.4. Say "no" to "erase customizations?". .emacs gets written.

[Michael Albinus]

Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

>> [ How did you end up with gnu-emacs-bug@moderators.isc.org in the "To:"
>>   field?  ]
>
> This is going to make Glenn unhappy.  I posted it via Usenet, for lack
> of getting a CC of my original bug report to which I could've replied.
> It seems the bug-gnu-emacs mail server has been reconfigured not to send
> CCs to people involved by default, and I'm not subscribed to
> bug-gnu-emacs at the moment.

I do read all gnu-emacs MLs via gmane, which allows me to reply w/o such
problems. Maybe you give it a try.

(setq gnus-secondary-select-methods
        '((nnml "")
	  ...
	  (nntp "news" (nntp-address "news.gmane.org")))
      gnus-select-method '(nnnil))

Best regards, Michael.

bug#18725: [PATCH]: Emacs 24.4. Say "no" to "erase customizations?". .emacs gets written.

[Stefan Monnier]

> This is going to make Glenn unhappy.  I posted it via Usenet, for lack
> of getting a CC of my original bug report to which I could've replied.

IIUC by default you don't get a Cc, indeed.
But you do receive a acknowledgment, instead, which should work fine
for replying.  Maybe the acknowledgment should contain the original
report as an attachment (or does it already?  I can't remember and
don't have one on hand).
I'd expect that many users would be confused if they received an
automatic Cc: for their bug-reports.


        Stefan

bug#18725: [PATCH]: Emacs 24.4. Say "no" to "erase customizations?". .emacs gets written.

[Stefan Monnier]

> Are we sure this is safe?

It looks pretty safe to me, yes.
It looks more like an omission, really (it makes it work more like Custom-save).


        Stefan