Subject: Re: bug#75626: 31.0.50; Dired misses or double-processes files when auto-revert-mode is enabled

From: Tassilo Horn <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2025 12:15:57 +0100

Michael Albinus <[email-masked]> writes:

>> Even if we would like to cater for this case, I don't understand how
>> your approach addresses the retries for buffers that skipped/inhibited
>> auto-revert.  I mean, I can envision that auto-revert maintains a list
>> of buffers it skipped but how would that be worked through?  Another
>> timer that runs more often that auto-revert-interval?
>
> I haven't investigated this yet. Perhaps you are right, and a later
> polling does the job. But this problem is recent anyway (if it is a
> problem); my proposal doesn't make it worse.

Yes, that's for sure.

>> One fact in favour for some inhibit-auto-revert variable is that
>> currently we abuse buffer-stale-function whose docs state "Function
>> to check wether a buffer _needs_ reverting" with functions that
>> actually check if we need and _allow_ reverting.  If we had
>> inhibit-auto-revert, the allowance part could and should be removed
>> from buffer-stale-function.
>
> See my patch, it does exactly this.

I don't agree, see my other mail.  In your patch, it's still
dired-buffer-stale-p who does the allowance check.

Bye,
Tassilo