From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: RMAIL file locking problem?
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 19:37:57 -0400
Message-ID: <E1DSO0b-0008TC-6w@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <ufyxm68t2.fsf@boris.poly.laptop>
	<E1DOGdB-0004Vm-DN@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<uhdhrfsz6.fsf@boris.laptop> <E1DRJ8V-0004ZX-2L@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<uacngf2st.fsf@boris.laptop>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1114990553 9420 80.91.229.2 (1 May 2005 23:35:53 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 23:35:53 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 02 01:35:52 2005
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1DSNyG-0005C2-RW
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 02 May 2005 01:35:33 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1DSO53-0006az-St
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 19:42:33 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1DSO45-000676-5U
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 19:41:33 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1DSO43-00065v-45
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 19:41:31 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DSO42-00064m-JZ
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 19:41:30 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DSO4w-0001VV-L4
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 19:42:26 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1DSO0b-0008TC-6w; Sun, 01 May 2005 19:37:57 -0400
Original-To: Evil Boris <evilborisnet@netscape.net>
In-reply-to: <uacngf2st.fsf@boris.laptop> (message from Evil Boris on Sat, 30
	Apr 2005 16:05:38 -0400)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:36574
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:36574

    Or could one check the C code for "insert-file-contents"?  Does it
    mark the buffer modified if 0 bytes were read.

The code appears specifically to avoid marking the buffer modified
if the file has zero size.  I just did a test, inserting an empty
file into a buffer this way.  It did not mark the buffer modified
and did not lock the file.

Something we don't understand must be happening, and only you
are in a position to debug it.