From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Juanma Barranquero" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: A few questions about desktop.el Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 01:28:00 +0200 Message-ID: References: <877j55gb6p.fsf@jurta.org> <4458C031.5060201@soem.dk> <36957.128.165.123.132.1146760030.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> <35277.128.165.123.18.1181337422.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> <87d506hz80.fsf@jurta.org> <54274.128.165.0.81.1181350302.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> <87hcpg7r2n.fsf@jurta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1181518117 9944 80.91.229.12 (10 Jun 2007 23:28:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 23:28:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Juri Linkov" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 11 01:28:36 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HxWpn-00053H-V5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 01:28:36 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HxWpn-0005vo-FY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 19:28:35 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HxWpH-0005c7-2J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 19:28:03 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HxWpF-0005b3-MP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 19:28:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HxWpF-0005as-Ex for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 19:28:01 -0400 Original-Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.228]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HxWpF-0004Am-4R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 19:28:01 -0400 Original-Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id h26so1267359wxd for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 16:28:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=oAZ/WTypyurh1C/ebI4XJVCoDTT9t8fuvcOszjsKEK89wzG2Q6AZkZLBbUEWiD5DXyspFet6R9c1klzIKtEtGgwIx9ZaG8i16bJYEt6wCpyTntahC9zqkZVza17enZkbvJg1OIUhqglHHNO6f7G7GmHCYLT3UZ1ztdWBIoLpCow= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=EA5doeG/QH/OkDHK/oQ/wwAPnvPKvL6KKp6AWiVEfeJ4UQLSEoj7WnMtIs0BRGfuFtPIf8aVFKJuSeDV7rh/tSC4P9XCJW3rADLUky3tuM7L+OMAFvvr5hKug4Dhhsx7ZQL5x3y1cQGrq+qEOQmcBoU6ZZ6sj4qcIvYz9ZzvnI8= Original-Received: by 10.90.88.13 with SMTP id l13mr4660351agb.1181518080344; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 16:28:00 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.90.103.8 with HTTP; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 16:28:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87hcpg7r2n.fsf@jurta.org> Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 (Google crawlbot) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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:72595 Archived-At: On 6/9/07, Juri Linkov wrote: > Overwriting the desktop of another Emacs instance is not a good thing to do. Well, that's exactly what happens without this patch. > Not writing the desktop would be acceptable if it displayed a message > about this failure. What is the exact use case? > Another alternative is to write the desktop file with a different name. You can already do that, with or without the patch. The patch offers you the alternative of detecting the conflict when you run the second Emacs instance, so you chose not to load the desktop, and then manually set another name for it or create it in another directory. > All on all, we could leave this to the user's discretion. The user should be > careful about not creating a configuration where two Emacs instances > automatically write to the same file. I'm not sure what this means: are you proposing not installing the patch? Because the point (to me anyway) is not having a configuration where two instances write to the same file, but detecting the case when that happens by accident. The patch is very useful and works quite well (though I've added it an option to configure whether the second instance should automatically overwrite a conflicting desktop file, automatically skip loading it, or ask the user, instead of always asking as Davis' original patch does). I propose installing it and seeing what other people thinks of it. Juanma