From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Glenn Morris Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#8179: 24.0.50; vc thinks that SVN takes care of all my files Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:41:37 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1300216118 21071 80.91.229.12 (15 Mar 2011 19:08:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 19:08:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 8179@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 15 20:08:34 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PzZbc-0007z2-Ur for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 20:08:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58077 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PzZbc-00087C-45 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:08:32 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=47251 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PzZaA-0007Bl-5f for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:07:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PzZa7-0003dX-Uy for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:07:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:35769) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PzZa7-0003dS-S5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:06:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PzZBy-00007b-9G; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:42:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Glenn Morris Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 18:42:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 8179 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 8179-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B8179.1300214506444 (code B ref 8179); Tue, 15 Mar 2011 18:42:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 8179) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Mar 2011 18:41:46 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PzZBi-000077-0L for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:41:46 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PzZBf-00006u-Hs for 8179@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:41:44 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38165) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PzZBa-0002rw-1U; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:41:38 -0400 X-Spook: Geraldton Islam Abduganievich Karimov Area 51 CNCIS X-Ran: Kk|CfvKQ4)j:GFPm5sTZb+vgjmH+@<>kdcwUoh (Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen's message of "Tue, 15 Mar 2011 19:03:21 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:42:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:45051 Archived-At: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Are all these VCs really that, er, difficult to determine whether they > are in effect or not? I thought they all pretty much used a .git (or > the like) in the current directory, but that's obviously wrong... We're only talking about unregistered files, right? For registered files, it should get it correct every time. For unregistered files, IIUC it effectively does: (for backend in BACKENDS ... (for directory in PWD PARENTS ... ) rather than: (for directory in PWD PARENTS ... ) (for backend in BACKENDS ... ) I agree that the second method does seem more sensible on the face of it, but the former is the documented way it works. It may to some extent be an artifact of the basic design dating from the days when you had eg a CVS directory in every directory. The "modern" VCS have eg a single .bzr in the parent directory, not one in every subdir as well. Well, actually I think the doc is misleading too: "Registering a File for Version Control" If the file's directory already contains files registered in a version control system, Emacs uses that system. If there is more than one system in use for a directory, Emacs uses the one that appears first in @code{vc-handled-backends}. I don't think the first sentence is correct. Anyway, I think investigating if it can be made to work the other way would be a worthwhile experiment.