From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Jared Finder" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: TAGS buffer generates spurious undo warnings Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 13:47:39 -0700 Message-ID: <75DAF0131F83954E9E91C128EF9C7D838A4F64@galaxy.paragon.crypticstudios.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1193957675 29026 80.91.229.12 (1 Nov 2007 22:54:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 22:54:35 +0000 (UTC) To: "Glenn Morris" , Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 01 23:54:36 2007 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 1Inivp-0007Ck-6R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 23:54:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Inivf-0003WC-36 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:54:23 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1InhHv-0005L9-EV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 17:09:15 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1InhHs-0005Kc-R3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 17:09:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1InhHs-0005KZ-O0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 17:09:12 -0400 Original-Received: from exchange.crypticstudios.com ([12.191.195.130] helo=crypticstudios.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1InhHs-0007oa-Ex for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 17:09:12 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: TAGS buffer generates spurious undo warnings Thread-Index: Acgcv7l4jOsnLNAzTNux8zllUdlH/AACJQwA X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Windows 2000 SP4, XP SP1+ X-Greylist: delayed 1324 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at monty-python; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 17:09:12 EDT X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:54:20 -0400 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:82325 Archived-At: Still happens, but I have not been able to track down why. Ct happens on my work box on Win32, but not on my Debian box at home. Also, it only happens if I load my .emacs, even though I'm using the exact same .emacs at home and at work. -- MJF -----Original Message----- From: Glenn Morris [mailto:rgm@gnu.org]=20 Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 12:40 PM To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cc: Jared Finder Subject: TAGS buffer generates spurious undo warnings Jared Finder wrote: > Re-loading a really large TAGS buffer generates a spurious warning > about undo info being discarded. TAGS buffers have no need for undo > info! Why not just disable undo in TAGS and BROWSE and similar buffers? Can anyone see how this could happen? It may be obvious, but I looked at the code and couldn't see how such a wanring would come about. I'm reluctant to disable undo just for the sake of it... (Undo in BROWSE has already been disabled AFAIK.)