From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: The emacsclient socket vs. etc/emacs.bash
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 20:26:13 -0500
Message-ID: <E1Gsqyj-0001tH-0g@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <87odqe4jg2.fsf@pacem.orebokech.com>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: dough.gmane.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1165627676 29605 80.91.229.10 (9 Dec 2006 01:27:56 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2006 01:27:56 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 09 02:27:55 2006
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by dough.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1Gsr0J-0000AY-1a
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Dec 2006 02:27:51 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Gsr0I-0005NC-HC
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 20:27:50 -0500
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Gsqyk-0004V1-Jd
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 20:26:14 -0500
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Gsqyk-0004UJ-0a
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 20:26:14 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gsqyj-0004U9-Rr
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 20:26:13 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1Gsqyj-0000B3-PG
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 20:26:13 -0500
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.52)
	id 1Gsqyj-0001tH-0g; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 20:26:13 -0500
Original-To: Romain Francoise <romain@orebokech.com>
In-reply-to: <87odqe4jg2.fsf@pacem.orebokech.com> (message from Romain
	Francoise on Fri, 08 Dec 2006 14:15:57 +0100)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.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://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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:63482
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/63482>

    If I understand the recent changes to server.el correctly, Emacs
    shouldn't delete the socket on exit, because it might be a socket
    started by another Emacs instance and not the original socket.

Could someone explain how that can make sense?
It seems like asking for trouble not to delete the socket.