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: bug#870: Repeatable instance of bug#870 Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:28:25 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4961E7F7.2000509@gnu.org> <4961ED68.1090609@gnu.org> <4962100E.4060808@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1231165723 19915 80.91.229.12 (5 Jan 2009 14:28:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 14:28:43 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 870@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Devel To: "Jason Rumney" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 05 15:29:53 2009 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 1LJqSm-00011L-3t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 15:29:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54518 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LJqRW-0002ad-IP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 09:28:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LJqRS-0002aY-7i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 09:28:30 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LJqRP-0002aL-Rn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 09:28:28 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33403 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LJqRP-0002aI-Ma for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 09:28:27 -0500 Original-Received: from yw-out-1718.google.com ([74.125.46.157]:32048) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LJqRO-0007ES-Dh; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 09:28:26 -0500 Original-Received: by yw-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 9so2419933ywk.66 for ; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 06:28:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; 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; bh=s63wXUWEeg0SYBriglhjrDoQNJsQUdANwDLZpvZ3OMM=; b=JLR2izIkAO9AD2+PP4iu+dpAtdTrT8ORCusPgDxddc1vQLG9LnonfnoVcRIffcWAvl 3l/9KtWkdR/05Ld+3c6zeTRRH+eXtc0xKTZXDLYppIgcd3m1tk2SqtqgCDl3F2VKRwWk /VmQ6YHByelhzZIgsC+yE16dqZVO9x36nr3kQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=LPpidG1hODAiv+0FQohcwbkN5PTOHAs+5zv6lcm9VDYFA2O0lAMZBGT4aXn0QMf54G Q/xKYi9PwXvf+kS19auTWTVKSNR0s1pxGaMcMgqfhQToQ4X3oCgf+mVFWNhA1CvPh/Mv hJ0Q5So30yA13a15pBvxo9jT1+Tcvi2hZsnBc= Original-Received: by 10.100.227.6 with SMTP id z6mr11019251ang.120.1231165705828; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 06:28:25 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.100.252.15 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Jan 2009 06:28:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4962100E.4060808@gnu.org> Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:107612 Archived-At: On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 14:50, Jason Rumney wrote: > So > maybe I am wrong about exactly what happens in that part of the decode > functions - maybe the CR does get written to the buffer, but the following > LF is somehow swallowed. The bug does not happen on encoding (for writing), because it is already visible after re-decoding (I mean, after desktop.el applies buffer-file-coding-system, or after the revert-buffer-with-coding-system call in your example). Once the buffer has the lone ^M, it's no wonder it ends up in the file after writing. I think you're right that the problem is related to decoding a CRLF when the pair crosses a buffer boundary. Juanma