From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Run coding system auto-detection manually?
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:23:12 -0600 (MDT)
Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
Message-ID: <200208071423.g77ENCp03041@wijiji.santafe.edu>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1020805074633.25320B@is>
	<vafr8hdio0k.fsf@INBOX.auto.emacs.devel.tok.lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
	<200208060150.g761oMF28979@wijiji.santafe.edu> <vafofcge2ry.fsf@INBOX.auto.emacs.devel.tok.lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1028730393 23214 127.0.0.1 (7 Aug 2002 14:26:33 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 14:26:33 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: eliz@is.elta.co.il, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Return-path: <emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 17cRlg-00062J-00
	for <emacs-devel@main.gmane.org>; Wed, 07 Aug 2002 16:26:32 +0200
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 17cS7J-000094-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Wed, 07 Aug 2002 16:48:53 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 17cRjN-0007xP-00; Wed, 07 Aug 2002 10:24:09 -0400
Original-Received: from pele.santafe.edu ([192.12.12.119])
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 17cRiU-0007kN-00; Wed, 07 Aug 2002 10:23:14 -0400
Original-Received: from wijiji.santafe.edu (wijiji [192.12.12.5])
	by pele.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g77ENT518114;
	Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:23:29 -0600 (MDT)
Original-Received: (from rms@localhost)
	by wijiji.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) id g77ENCp03041;
	Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:23:12 -0600 (MDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: wijiji.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@wijiji using -f
Original-To: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE
Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Emacs development discussions. <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel/>
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:6336
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:6336

    This is in the "precious" case.  So you can see that the real
    filename is in the VISIT argument, not in the LOCKNAME argument.  I
    got those two confused before.

As far as I can tell, the code uses only the FILENAME argument for
computing the coding system, not VISIT or LOCKNAME.

    After reading the C code, I get the impression that I can always use
    find-operation-coding-system explicitly to find the right coding
    system to use.  Right?

Yes, I think you can do that.  So you can probably solve this problem.
However, we may still have a bug in the handling of precious files.

Handa, if you could examine that code and see if it can misbehave,
that would be useful.