From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Per Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Close .emacs file after customization? Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 08:48:24 +0100 Organization: The Church of Emacs Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1046418651 21009 80.91.224.249 (28 Feb 2003 07:50:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 07:50:51 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18ofHz-0005SP-00 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 08:50:39 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18ofZI-0008FZ-00 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 09:08:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18ofGu-00053S-01 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 02:49:32 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18ofGW-0004qd-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 02:49:08 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18ofGR-0004Zp-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 02:49:05 -0500 Original-Received: from sheridan.dina.kvl.dk ([130.225.40.227]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18ofGQ-0003TA-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 02:49:03 -0500 Original-Received: from zuse.dina.kvl.dk (zuse.dina.kvl.dk [130.225.40.245]) IAA12101 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 08:48:26 +0100 Original-Received: (from abraham@localhost) by zuse.dina.kvl.dk (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) id h1S7mOB16360; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 08:48:24 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: zuse.dina.kvl.dk: abraham set sender to abraham@dina.kvl.dk using -f Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Face: +kRV2]2q}lixHkE{U)mY#+6]{AH=yN~S9@IFiOa@X6?GM|8MBp/ In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Thu, 27 Feb 2003 17:30:25 -0500") Original-Lines: 19 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090007 (Oort Gnus v0.07) Emacs/21.1 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:12021 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:12021 Richard Stallman writes: > You will get a warning if customize *does not* kill the .emacs buffer > after saving customization, which is currently the case, but that is > precisely what the original poster wanted to change. > > If Emacs already has a buffer visiting .emacs, and that file has > changed on disk, visiting it again will ask whether to reread the > file. The only advantage of killing the buffer is that you won't have > to answer that question. Is that a major advantage? Is it an advantage at all? Emacs will warn in a situation where there is a very real danger that it will overwrite some customization saved from another Emacs instance, i.e. the user will lose some work. I'd expect we want a warning in that case.