GNU bug report logs - #12507
24.2.50; `bookmark-write-file': use `write-file', not `write-region', to get backups

Previous Next

Full log

Message #61 received at 12507 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Karl Fogel'" <kfogel <at> red-bean.com>
Cc: 'Chong Yidong' <cyd <at> gnu.org>, 12507 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#12507: [debbugs-tracker] Processed: severity 12507 wishlist
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 11:32:49 -0700

> >> Set `bookmark-version-control' to `t', of course.
> >
> > OK, I thought of that, but that seems like a strange thing 
> > for the doc to suggest: customize it to `t', save your bookmark
> > file, then re/un-customize it back to the default, `nil'.
> 
> Sorry?  I'm maybe not understanding your question.

My bad.  Please ignore the question.

The values essentially come from `version-control', where what's being decided
is for all files.  Since this is only for the bookmark file there is not a big
need for offering both `nil' and `never' values.  I think that is what confused
me somehow.

The only real choices for the bookmark file are using numbered or unnumbered
backups, and whether to let `version-control' decide that: i.e., values `t',
`never', and `nospecial'.

`nil' (vs `t') has meaning here only if you somehow already had a numbered
backup for the bookmark file.  `nil' makes sense for `version-control', however,
because that option governs multiple files.

If the value here is `nospecial' and the `version-control' value is `nil', then
you get the same result as `never' for the bookmark file, unless you previously
customized `b-v-c' to `t'.  I think that's the case that I was finding
confusing.  I was wondering how, in that case, a user might have created a
numbered backup in the first place.

It's not important.  Sorry for the noise.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.