From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Proposed patch: allow user to disable lockfile creation Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2011 09:36:33 +0200 Organization: Organization?!? Message-ID: <877h702pa6.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <87ei1bqi8p.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <4E31B6CB.3040905@cs.ucla.edu> <87fwlo3ljr.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1312011419 15739 80.91.229.12 (30 Jul 2011 07:36:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2011 07:36:59 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 30 09:36:55 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qn46P-0007fI-7v for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 09:36:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43098 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qn46O-00019m-Ox for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 03:36:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:47943) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qn46M-00019h-GQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 03:36:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qn46L-00038u-Bm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 03:36:50 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:51565) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qn46L-00038p-3d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 03:36:49 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qn46G-0007bg-Dj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 09:36:44 +0200 Original-Received: from p508ed3f4.dip.t-dialin.net ([80.142.211.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 09:36:44 +0200 Original-Received: from dak by p508ed3f4.dip.t-dialin.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 09:36:44 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 23 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: p508ed3f4.dip.t-dialin.net X-Face: 2FEFf>]>q>2iw=B6, xrUubRI>pR&Ml9=ao@P@i)L:\urd*t9M~y1^:+Y]'C0~{mAl`oQuAl \!3KEIp?*w`|bL5qr,H)LFO6Q=qx~iH4DN; i"; /yuIsqbLLCh/!U#X[S~(5eZ41to5f%E@'ELIi$t^ Vc\LWP@J5p^rst0+('>Er0=^1{]M9!p?&:\z]|;&=NP3AhB!B_bi^]Pfkw User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:megWFoB61wcVXQY/GGvC1pZC9mU= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:142510 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > Any locking scheme should make sure that it does not interact with other > programs: quite often I start a compilation and continue editing the > file in question, making sure I don't save until the compilation has > finished. > > If Emacs uses an advisory lock, and the PDF viewer does not use one, > will that give the desired result? The PDF viewer was an example for an application that causes grief by locking in connection with compilation processes. One does not need Emacs to have, say, a LaTeX compilation fail because a PDF viewer blocks the resulting file. I was trying to say that we should try to keep Emacs from being as annoying in program/file interaction as those viewers are. I have no personal experience with advisory locking, so I can't answer your question. Maybe somebody else can? -- David Kastrup