From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Selection changes in revno 100822 Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 16:02:59 +0300 Message-ID: <83mxsptkho.fsf@gnu.org> References: <834oeyv3ww.fsf@gnu.org> <87mxsqyp98.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <83zkwptyij.fsf@gnu.org> <87tymx38m2.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <83tymxtuzm.fsf@gnu.org> <83pqxltmgr.fsf@gnu.org> <87lj892wzg.fsf@catnip.gol.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1281791121 25858 80.91.229.12 (14 Aug 2010 13:05:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:05:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Miles Bader Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 14 15:05:20 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OkGQJ-0006gB-P4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 14 Aug 2010 15:05:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47116 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OkGQH-0002Op-N4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 14 Aug 2010 09:05:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=39856 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OkGQ7-0002Nn-Vi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Aug 2010 09:05:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OkGQ3-00008I-2R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Aug 2010 09:05:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:42719) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OkGQ2-00007t-Pa; Sat, 14 Aug 2010 09:05:02 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0L750080084QJ900@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Sat, 14 Aug 2010 16:05:01 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.102.143]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0L75007T58CCYZ80@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Sat, 14 Aug 2010 16:05:01 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <87lj892wzg.fsf@catnip.gol.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) 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:128683 Archived-At: > From: Miles Bader > Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 21:35:15 +0900 > > > Given Jan's clarifications, doesn't Emacs on X put any selected text > > in the primary selection, no matter how it was selected? > > No, if you select text with "C-@ "C-w" to get it in the primary) The last part, about C-w, is with x-select-enable-primary non-nil, right? With the default nil value, IIUC, C-w should _not_ put text into primary, just into the clipboard. That's what I understand from Jan's explanations. > though now that I test it, "shift selected" text _does_ get put in > the primary (lame!). Why ``lame''? Selections with C-SPC+movement and with Shift+movement are different, so why expect them to behave the same. I think shift-selected text is conceptually like mouse-selected text. Do you expect mouse-selected text also not set the primary selection? > Sometimes I think this stuff is just completely random... I know the feeling ;-)