Re: problem reading ~/.emacs.desktop

[ken <gebser@mousecar.com>]

On 09/19/2009 11:29 PM Juanma Barranquero wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 05:04, ken <gebser@mousecar.com> wrote:
> 
>> Very cool idea.  ....

I like the idea of creating, in effect, a new and totally clean
environment in which to test.  Another step in the process to implement:
before setting the new $HOME variable, run "bash -" (or whatever shell
used).  This creates a new shell.  The new shell's environment, though a
copy of the previous, can be manipulated and changed and after testing
easily wiped out simply by exiting that new shell.


> 
>> ....
>
> Yeah, my mistake, I meant desktop-read.

Small thing.  Funny how the mind can lose one little piece in a long
series of steps.  We were already by then on the same page, so no big deal.


> 
> This test shows that your Emacs setup does not have any trouble
> reading or writing desktop files. So the one that gives you trouble
> must have some formatting problem or somesuch. I'd suggest just
> deleting it and recreating it (by loading the files you want to have
> and then M-x desktop-save'ing).

In fact that's pretty much what I did.  I grepped the old
".emacs.desktop" to output just the filenames and fed this into emacs at
load time.  I knew emacs would load all the files, but I didn't think it
would remember the point (text cursor) position was in my previous
session.  Somehow it did though... that's a puzzle to me.

That was my plan of last resort-- at least I would have the files loaded
that I wanted.  My other concern though was for other folks who upgrade
emacs and would expect it to load up all their files from their last
pre-upgrade session; this wouldn't happen for them.  That is,
.emacs.desktop has (I think) a version number; it should recognize it
and take appropriate action and provide a smoother upgrade path.  This
would include an accounting for a simultaneous system upgrade from some
other locale definitions to UTF-8; this might have been (part of?) the
problem with "205" displaying as an 'I' with a diacritical mark.  I'm
not sure... just a hunch.



> 
>> Hey, you're good.  Yeah, I've got some of that in one of my files.  But
>> what's the "suffix" that's missing?
> 
> It means that Emacs thinks that the Local Variables section has a
> format problem; that's why I ask about CRLF vs LF.
> 
> ....

Thanks for the explanation... very good and very clear.  With that I'll
search through my files for Local Variables and should be able to locate
and fix what needs it.

Juanma, thanks for all the tips, help, and clarifications.  You're on my
A-Team list.


Best,
ken