From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dima Kogan Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#69819: 30.0.50; comint-mode does not always respect the read-only flag Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2024 21:57:26 -0700 Message-ID: <87v85kw2j7.fsf@secretsauce.net> References: <87frwrxnqr.fsf@secretsauce.net> <86r0ga7iju.fsf@gnu.org> <874jd4y6fq.fsf@secretsauce.net> <86v85k4nhb.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="27546"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: mu4e 1.10.8; emacs 30.0.50 Cc: 69819@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 18 06:08:55 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rm5Ez-0006tN-A6 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 06:08:54 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rm5EY-0000zj-NB; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 01:08:26 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rm5EW-0000za-V7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 01:08:25 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rm5EW-0008Ki-Mv for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 01:08:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rm5F8-00030Z-9y for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 01:09:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Dima Kogan Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 05:09:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69819 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 69819-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B69819.171073852611504 (code B ref 69819); Mon, 18 Mar 2024 05:09:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 69819) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Mar 2024 05:08:46 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34195 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rm5Es-0002zT-1t for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 01:08:46 -0400 Original-Received: from fhigh2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([103.168.172.153]:52189) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rm5Eq-0002z2-NV for 69819@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 01:08:45 -0400 Original-Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailfhigh.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A07CA11400E8; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 01:08:01 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 18 Mar 2024 01:08:01 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=secretsauce.net; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1710738481; x= 1710824881; bh=U07VN1tISpBb0nV8iz9GUcNvn8rCJsuOf0QDfSEdxqM=; b=L fIFrUCpKxmgXtRw4K1K5sqxUfST1/ykmYPWMylXfCU3sYCWodq47L/8yXbdrrfa/ lAetfZKIFGjFwV4Zo2yw2XHj/bT0ndTY6RzN2zVvguGmSn0iucjih2GBFLf8Xgr7 qdSVXUX8FCEkju0IzSuIt31fV4Vm2/2nE9TeI0otUQE6BLmSKCC6LZ0pkyaLu2Ps dK34/AkOqS7UOwOzAb/AbI3IiMoVj5mFsncF35rwEo/0JU7QhhAA44V8QwVXyXSw sJIZxP5Er82XIsrERHd+WbB3cU+NxNnCigtu62uMfEpiUiDagjTrmUlvHv0iTXaa r+Di+3WEzEIFRtR001l7A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1710738481; x=1710824881; bh=U07VN1tISpBb0nV8iz9GUcNvn8rC JsuOf0QDfSEdxqM=; b=XZkuH55K2OLXoCXYsNCpQeckn1WmNZKBsfL4t8CVqbea gcsAnUd2QBLeenUcYHRTb+K0uUqzPVOudtAxQMo7eOZXrxfH5rWb9s29hLmVXoZ5 uoObVlzUPWtqC/GpeG3OnOvXGN7Io1X5C92AyJVxSqazJw+cMIti6/8JIH6ZbhFq LvhUGRn0Tn9jakaJbMlgcybSqhH87fC95LXG0YRtFx24rajdONWvsyHA7ogkzkdE UTaU2zh+Kl+Fqcg7HLg65b+rZcifby53i4ZhZInRTJVprAcF/wzRPhz/sapRzbwH Z8FTqwS970nY2HaFP3HyjU+1bHFlUIIEjOgetkprvw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvledrkeeigdektdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpehffgfhvfevufffjgfkgggtsehttdertddtredtnecuhfhrohhmpeffihhmrgcu mfhoghgrnhcuoeguihhmrgesshgvtghrvghtshgruhgtvgdrnhgvtheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepgfeifeehgedvkeekvdevvdelvdegleevtedvueejvdejveduveeuleevleev udetnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepug himhgrsehsvggtrhgvthhsrghutggvrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i3e8042a0:Fastmail Original-Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 01:08:00 -0400 (EDT) In-reply-to: <86v85k4nhb.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:281791 Archived-At: > What expectation, exactly? The buffer is not changed; the process is > terminated, but that's not the same as changing the process's buffer! The buffer IS changed, actually: when the inferior process dies, it prints a message into the buffer: Process shell<1> finished But that's a red herring I think: if the inferior process died, but the printing was blocked by the read-only mode, I would still consider that to be a bug. My use case is this. I use shell-mode buffers extensively. Periodically I want to examine the output of some command in a *shell* buffer: compare it against other data, look at it, cut/paste it, whatever. While I'm doing that I don't want to accidentally change anything, so I C-x C-q. Then accidental keystrokes don't end up changing anything. UNLESS that accidental keystroke is C-d (and probably a few others I haven't hit by mistake yet). This use case and expectation seems reasonable to me. Thanks.