From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: quimby.gnus.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [simon.marshall@misys.com: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?] Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 14:07:53 +0200 (IST) Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: quimby2.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: quimby2.netfonds.no 1014639139 6808 195.204.10.66 (25 Feb 2002 12:12:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@quimby2.netfonds.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Feb 2002 12:12:19 GMT Cc: schwab@suse.de, monnier+gnu/emacs@RUM.cs.yale.edu, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby2.netfonds.no with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16fJzO-0001li-00 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 13:12:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16fJwP-0000Pa-00; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 07:09:13 -0500 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16fJw8-0000Oz-00; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 07:08:56 -0500 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA02970; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 14:07:54 +0200 (IST) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Kenichi Handa In-Reply-To: <200202251158.UAA02048@etlken.m17n.org> Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: quimby.gnus.org gmane.emacs.devel:1522 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:1522 On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Kenichi Handa wrote: > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Andreas Schwab wrote: > > >> I don't think that revert-buffer should autodetect at all. > > > IIRC, that's what it does now: it uses the value of > > buffer-file-coding-system to decode the file. > > ??? The words after ":" is correct, thus the words before > ":" is wrong. Andreas says Emacs should not autodetect in revert-buffer. What I meant to say is that it doesn't autodetect right now: it uses whatever buffer-file-coding-system says. > It uses the value of buffer-file-coding-system, thus it does > NOT autodetect the encoding. Exactly. That's what I wanted to say. I believe Andreas said that this is how it should stay. However, this thread started when Simon asked that it _did_ autodetect, at least the EOL format. > Of course, C-x RET c undecided M-x revert-buffer will force > Emacs autodetection. It does auto-detect, but it doesn't change buffer-file-coding-system. So if you visit a DOS file, then run dos2unix on it, and the revert-buffer with "C-x RET c unix RET", and edit and save the buffer, it gets saved with DOS EOL format. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel