Subject: Re: bug#35497: [PATCH] Don't rewrite buffer contents after saving by rename

From: Michael Albinus <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 22:47:51 +0200

Jonathan Tomer <[email-masked]> writes:

Hi Jonathan,

> Thanks, I'll fix. What's the preferred mechanism for sending an
> updated patch -- send an entirely new patch (relative to upstream) on
> a new thread, or on this thread, or a delta to apply as an additional
> commit on top of my previous patch?

Please reply to these messages, keeping [email-masked] in To: or Cc:.
This archives your message in the bug tracker.

Usually, we appreciate a new patch relative to upstream. But in this
case, not changing etc/NEWS, I believe it isn't necessary to send a new
patch until there are other changes you want to show.

> That said, I'm happy to add a test to tramp-tests.el as well; at the
> very least, with the mock tramp method we should see that the
> destination file is renamed-to rather than overwritten as well.

Pls do.

Btw, your new test in files-tests.el uses file notifications. Possible
of course. But wouldn't it be more robust to check the inode number of
the involved files, and how it changes, or not? See file-attributes how
to retrieve the inode number of a file.

> Thanks for the fast review!

Best regards, Michael.