OK. I attach the diff.

On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 10:57, Ikumi Keita <ikumi@ikumi.que.jp> wrote:

> Hi Vangelis,
>
> >>>>> Vangelis Evangelou <evangelou@gmail.com> writes:
> > Hi all.
> > I'm not sure what the ideal outcome is. It depends on each user's case.
> In
> > principle, indirect buffers have identical text content as their base
> > buffer, but different view properties, so the previews not showing in the
> > indirect buffer agrees with this principle. I therefore, agree with
> Paul's
> > comment.
>
> Thank you. Then I think AUCTeX can incorporate your proposal. Can you
> make an entry for doc/changes.texi and send the diff?
>
> To AUCTeX admins: Do you think Vangelis'es patch needs copyright
> assignment? In my opinion, it doesn't because definition of
> `TeX-buffer-file-name' is straightforward and other changes are trivial
> (replacements of `buffer-file-name' -> `TeX-buffer-file-name' or
> additions of `(with-current-buffer (or (buffer-base-buffer)
> (current-buffer))...')
>
> Regards,
> Ikumi Keita
> #StandWithUkraine #StopWarInUkraine
> #Gaza #StopMassiveKilling #CeasefireNOW
>