From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#26126: 26.0.50; file-notify-rm-watch removes arbitrary watches Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:44:55 +0200 Message-ID: <838tnx71u0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87r31x9ulw.fsf@luca> <87shmcney8.fsf@detlef> <87efxw7xvc.fsf@luca> <87mvcjophx.fsf@detlef> <87tw6rssoi.fsf@luca> <87pohfkmvh.fsf@detlef> <87lgs2sobr.fsf@luca> <87y3w2gywc.fsf@detlef> <878to21fty.fsf@luca> <87wpbl1u80.fsf@detlef> <87d1ddecx2.fsf@luca> <87efxtnk8m.fsf@detlef> <87tw6nd6nf.fsf@luca> <871strm323.fsf@detlef> <838tnywshh.fsf@gnu.org> <8737e54f8c.fsf@detlef> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1490197585 11520 195.159.176.226 (22 Mar 2017 15:46:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 15:46:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 26126@debbugs.gnu.org, politza@hochschule-trier.de To: Michael Albinus Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 22 16:46:13 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cqiSb-0001Gy-BH for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 16:46:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51706 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cqiSh-0003W5-Ai for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:46:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57592) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cqiSc-0003Uk-1i for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:46:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cqiSY-00016q-85 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:46:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:41390) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cqiSY-00016l-4v for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:46:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cqiSX-0004DY-WF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:46:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 15:46:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 26126 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 26126-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B26126.149019750916146 (code B ref 26126); Wed, 22 Mar 2017 15:46:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 26126) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Mar 2017 15:45:09 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39589 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cqiRh-0004CM-2U for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:45:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38058) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cqiRe-0004Bn-Pk for 26126@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:45:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cqiRW-0000pK-SH for 26126@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:45:01 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:46237) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cqiRW-0000pG-P4; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:44:58 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1173 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cqiRV-0000wU-W5; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:44:58 -0400 In-reply-to: <8737e54f8c.fsf@detlef> (message from Michael Albinus on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 14:23:47 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:130807 Archived-At: > From: Michael Albinus > Cc: politza@hochschule-trier.de, 26126@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 14:23:47 +0100 > > > But Andreas asks about calling remote handlers, about which we by > > definition know much less. > > Nope. We know exactly which remote handlers are called, and how they > behave. We know that about our handlers, yes. But that doesn't have to be the end of the story. Emacs is extensible. > Do you expect other implementations of remote handlers? Yes, why not? It's much easier to do that in Lisp than in C, where the local handlers should be implemented. > > In that context, it might indeed make sense to pass the file, not its > > parent directory, because the handler can easily reconstruct the > > parent directory if that's what it needs. By contrast, there's no way > > for the handler to intuit the file which was stripped. > > > > WDYT? > > I still don't understand what's the difference between local and remote > events in your eyes. See above. Admittedly, this is a minor point, so not worth arguing if you disagree with my POV. > I've tried to implement remote handlers to behave exactly like the > local ones. That's the Tramp philosophy. Right, but in this case there are 2 flavors of local handlers, and the question is on which of them to model the remote ones.