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

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Thierry Volpiatto'" <thierry.volpiatto <at> gmail.com>, <12507 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: bug#12507: [debbugs-tracker] Processed: severity 12507 wishlist
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2012 07:36:09 -0700

> > The question about visiting the file is still open, though.
>
> I am using now the patch I sent here yesterday and it works 
> really good, faster and do backups (numered) as expected.
> Hope it will be applied here in emacs because it DTRT.
> 
> I don't understand what is the problem with "visiting the file".
> See in precedent post why it is not bad visiting the file.
> In the special case of bookmark-write-file, it is really not the
> problem.

Your question is for Stefan.

Your patch is equivalent to the change I proposed originally: just replace
`write-region' with `write-file'.  Of course it works.  It is what I have been
using, with no problem.

But it has the other effects that Stefan mentioned, since the file is visited.
He seems to be objecting to that.  But it's not too clear - perhaps he was just
relating why the change from `write-file' was made, without expressing any
opinion.

And we have not heard anything from him in reply to my statement that there
seems to be no way to make a backup without also visiting the file.  If that
guess is correct then the choices would seem to be:

1. Provide for optional backups, visiting the file systematically.

2. Do not provide for optional backups, and never visit the file.

3. Provide for optional backups, but if the user chooses not to back up, then do
not visit the file.

With #3, the user would pay the price that Stefan mentions for visiting the file
only when s?he chooses backup.

Previous Next

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