GNU bug report logs - #49261
28.0.50; File Locking Breaks Presumptuous Toolchains

Previous Next

Full log

Message #254 received at 49261 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Michael Albinus <michael.albinus <at> gmx.de>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, ncaprisunfan <at> gmail.com, 49261 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#49261: 28.0.50; File Locking Breaks Presumptuous Toolchains
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 20:30:21 +0300

> From: Michael Albinus <michael.albinus <at> gmx.de>
> Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org,  ncaprisunfan <at> gmail.com,  49261 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 16:37:45 +0200
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> Hi Eli,
> 
> >> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org> writes:
> >>
> >> >> Until now, there are no file locks for remote files at all. I thought
> >> >> disabling it for remote files would be requested by some users for
> >> >> backward compatibility.
> >> >
> >> > Yeah, I think it's a good idea, and allowing REPLACEMENT to be nil seems
> >> > like the natural way to implement it.
> >>
> >> And now? You and Eli disagree in this point, and I don't know what to do.
> >
> > Which disagreement between us leaves you at an impasse?  If there is
> > indeed such a disagreement, maybe we could find a compromise which
> > will allow some way forward.
> 
> Lars agrees my proposal to use lock-file-name-transforms for disabling
> file locks. You did argue against.

Are we talking about disabling remote locks by default?  If so, how
about disabling them via a more user-friendly option?  It strikes me
as weird and un-intuitive to _disable_ something via a "transform"
function.  And it will definitely be more complex to set up such a
"transform" function than just use a boolean flag.

Previous Next

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