From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Don't complain about changed file when it hasn't changed Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 21:09:34 +0300 Message-ID: <83zinva1lt.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83oa4bbq5b.fsf@gnu.org> <28f1147e-3aa7-b574-b420-ef18ebe699b5@lanl.gov> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1472494264 3030 195.159.176.226 (29 Aug 2016 18:11:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 18:11:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Davis Herring Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 29 20:10:56 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1beR1D-0007zb-IN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 20:10:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45111 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1beR19-0004tn-4a for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 14:10:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57222) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1beR0Q-0004ta-Md for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 14:10:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1beR0L-0003ms-VQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 14:09:58 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:38868) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1beR0L-0003mo-SW; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 14:09:53 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1547 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1beR0H-0000a4-Uz; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 14:09:52 -0400 In-reply-to: <28f1147e-3aa7-b574-b420-ef18ebe699b5@lanl.gov> (message from Davis Herring on Mon, 29 Aug 2016 11:50:43 -0600) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:206898 Archived-At: > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Davis Herring > Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 11:50:43 -0600 > > > Thanks. Can you describe the use case(s) where this is important? > > I can name one common case: "git rebase", where frequently the file's > original contents are (eventually) restored exactly. (A non-interactive > rebase does this when commits are moved on top of changes to other files.) I don't understand why Git touches files it doesn't need to change. It can (and does, AFAIK) compute the checksum of a file to know whether it changed. > To me, avoiding the prompt is nice, but retaining the undo list is the > important part. (Thanks, Stefan!) Should it be what is mentioned in NEWS? AFAIU, the undo records are kept because you don't revert the buffer, not because of the check. You could refuse to revert with the current code, and keep the undo information, right?