From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: find-file-not-found-functions
Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 08:46:17 -0400
Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org
Message-ID: <E1BTKH3-0008Tn-Iw@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <200405252058.i4PKwZH25711@raven.dms.auburn.edu>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1085673698 14209 80.91.224.253 (27 May 2004 16:01:38 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 16:01:38 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Thu May 27 18:01:09 2004
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1BTNJc-0002Kw-00
	for <emacs-devel@deer.gmane.org>; Thu, 27 May 2004 18:01:08 +0200
Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1BTNJc-0004r8-01
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Thu, 27 May 2004 18:01:08 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34)
	id 1BTMuV-0007IX-Sx
	for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Thu, 27 May 2004 11:35:11 -0400
Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.34)
	id 1BTLJ0-0000ss-Rr
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 May 2004 09:52:23 -0400
Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.34)
	id 1BTLIK-0000jX-Dn
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 May 2004 09:52:11 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BTKH3-0001Bg-VN
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 May 2004 08:46:18 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1BTKH3-0008Tn-Iw; Thu, 27 May 2004 08:46:17 -0400
Original-To: Luc Teirlinck <teirllm@dms.auburn.edu>
In-reply-to: <200405252058.i4PKwZH25711@raven.dms.auburn.edu> (message from
	Luc Teirlinck on Tue, 25 May 2004 15:58:35 -0500 (CDT))
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:24022
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:24022

      I now believe that, while my
    previous change made sense for `find-file-hook', it might have been a
    bad idea for `find-file-not-found-functions'.  I have the impression
    that PC-look-for-include-file and maybe other functions rely on
    inhibit-read-only being t.

It is cleaner not to set the flag over a large area.
I think the hook functions should be fixed instead.