GNU bug report logs - #26650
26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing

Previous Next

Full log

Message #27 received at 26650 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Tino Calancha <tino.calancha <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 26650 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Tino Calancha <tino.calancha <at> gmail.com>,
 npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental
 killing
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 19:36:54 +0900 (JST)

On Wed, 26 Apr 2017, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>> From: npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net
>> Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 08:50:00 -0400
>> Cc: 26650 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>>
>> diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/debug.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/debug.el
>> index 94b683dcb9..0aef94f1d2 100644
>> --- a/lisp/emacs-lisp/debug.el
>> +++ b/lisp/emacs-lisp/debug.el
>> @@ -753,6 +753,8 @@ debugger-mode
>>  \\{debugger-mode-map}"
>>    (setq truncate-lines t)
>>    (set-syntax-table emacs-lisp-mode-syntax-table)
>> +  (add-hook 'kill-buffer-hook
>> +            (lambda () (if (> (recursion-depth) 0) (top-level))) nil t)
>
> This will throw to top-level when _any_ buffer is killed, as long as
> we are in recursive-edit, no?
No, because `add-hook' is called with non-nil LOCAL arg.
> Shouldn't this hook do that only for *Backtrace*?
We can sandwich add-hook inside:
(when (eq (current-buffer) (get-buffer "*Backtrace*"))
  (add-hook ...
)

Then would be less general: just protect *Backtrace* for accidental 
killing.  So far that was my request so i'm fine with that.

Previous Next

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