From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: lisp/ChangeLog coding system Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 08:31:38 +0300 (IDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200204300518.g3U5Id506562@aztec.santafe.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1020144996 3905 127.0.0.1 (30 Apr 2002 05:36:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 05:36:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: gerd@gnu.org, kifer@cs.sunysb.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 172QJX-00010s-00 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 07:36:35 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 172QNd-0002zj-00 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 07:40:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 172QJF-0002i2-00; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 01:36:18 -0400 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 172QGL-0002A1-00; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 01:33:17 -0400 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA04123; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 08:31:38 +0300 (IDT) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Richard Stallman In-Reply-To: <200204300518.g3U5Id506562@aztec.santafe.edu> Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:3447 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:3447 On Mon, 29 Apr 2002, Richard Stallman wrote: > I think we should change save-buffer to pay attention to the coding: > cookie. > > It is supposed to do that indirectly because buffer-file-coding-system > should get set initially based on the `coding:' specification. > If something legitimately sets buffer-file-coding-system after that, > I think it ought to be obeyed, not ignored. Yes, but if buffer-file-coding-system is changed, the coding: cookie should be rewritten to reflect that, probably after warning the user about the presence of the cookie and asking for her permission to modify it. This is what I meant by ``pay attention''.