Subject: Re: bug#21833: 24.4; desktop-kill, which is interactive, is in kill-emacs-hook

From: Juanma Barranquero <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 10:39:59 +0100

On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Then I guess you are saying that in the case of emacs-lock there's no
> similar bug?

No bug. I thought about it and decided that aborting in kill-emacs-hook was
the more reasonable behavior. After all, if you take the trouble to tell
Emacs that a buffer is precious enough not to want Emacs to exit while the
buffer is alive, you won't want to lose it by accident. If you're so hard
pressed to do M-x kill-emacs <RET>, you can precede that with M-x
emacs-lock-mode <RET> to toggle the protection off.

> I'll probably agree (I don't use that package), but why does it have
> to tell us that desktop.el should behave the same?  It doesn't have
> the same purpose, right?

No, and I'm not arguing that desktop.el should behave the same. Just that
the case isn't so clear-cut as the bug report seems to imply. In any case,
if the sensible thing is not to ask anything from kill-emacs-hook
(emacs-lock doesn't, BTW), then we have to provide an option so the user
can chose if they want their current desktop silently saved, or silently
discarded.