Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

>> Sure, here is the patch I'm running with
>
> Isn't this comment part of the patch wrong?
>
> +;; We don't need this anymore, because now Custom inserts the
unlispified name
> +;; in the buffer.  (Bug#41905)
>
>
> Isn't the fix that it now inserts the _lispified_ name?
>

Yes, it was wrong, thank you.  But this was reverted, so it's all moot now.

>
> Anyway, thanks to all for working on this bug.
>
>   - OP for bug #400

Looks like we're back to where we started, though :-(