From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: file-precious-flag not taken seriously enough? Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:55:27 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87bpwkgmzp.fsf@red-bean.com> <87r65f4pgg.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> <87k5b5x5ey.fsf@red-bean.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1226761016 26564 80.91.229.12 (15 Nov 2008 14:56:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 14:56:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Kevin Rodgers , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 15 15:57:57 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1L1Mar-0003lz-T0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:57:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44713 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L1MZj-0003oY-P6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:56:39 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L1MYk-0003Ny-6a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:55:38 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L1MYi-0003NL-RQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:55:37 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38369 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L1MYi-0003NE-G6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:55:36 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca ([206.248.154.182]:63667 helo=ironport2-out.teksavvy.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L1MYh-0002CD-W2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:55:36 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ak4FAJNxHklMCrcy/2dsb2JhbACBbMwxgnmBFA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,610,1220241600"; d="scan'208";a="29915627" Original-Received: from 76-10-183-50.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([76.10.183.50]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 15 Nov 2008 09:55:33 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 7489B84E1; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:55:27 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87k5b5x5ey.fsf@red-bean.com> (Karl Fogel's message of "Fri, 14 Nov 2008 18:18:45 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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:105702 Archived-At: >> In case the usual file saving method results in a problem (which >> file-precious-flag was set to prevent), shouldn't there be a warning >> message here to inform the user? Not to distract him/her, but so that >> they can find a clue in the *Messages* buffer after something has gone >> wrong. > Or another option: at least flash a message that file-precious-flag is > going to be ignored, when that's the case. Yes, a message like "Dir read-only: ignoring file-precious-flag" sounds like a good idea. Stefan