GNU bug report logs - #78890
31.0.50; Messy vc-annotate buffer names

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net>
To: Sean Whitton <spwhitton <at> spwhitton.name>
Cc: Jim Porter <jporterbugs <at> gmail.com>, 78890 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Kristoffer Balintona <krisbalintona <at> gmail.com>
Subject: bug#78890: 31.0.50; Messy vc-annotate buffer names
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2025 18:30:25 +0200

On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 16:06:37 +0100 Sean Whitton <spwhitton <at> spwhitton.name> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> On Wed 25 Jun 2025 at 06:19pm +02, Stephen Berman via "Bug reports for GNU
> Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 25 Jun 2025 08:57:59 -0700 Jim Porter <jporterbugs <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/25/2025 8:47 AM, Stephen Berman via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss
>>> army knife of text editors wrote:
>>>> Oops, I should've checked instead of assuming.
>>>> (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0664250/quotes/?item=qt2409883)
>>>
>>> Well, when I looked at the code change, I'd have figured it would be in Emacs
>>> 30 too, since that line is the same in 30 and the master branch. The bug is
>>> new though, so something else changed, which worries me a little bit. It might
>>> be a good idea to figure out what cause this regression in case it causes
>>> other problems we're not aware of yet.
>>
>> I checked now, and in emacs-30 the current buffer when temp-buffer-name
>> is set is the one visiting the file being annotated, while in master
>> it's the buffer displaying the annotations.  In emacs-30 there is a call
>> to `vc-ensure-vc-buffer' before the let sexp where temp-buffer-name is
>> set, but not in master; adding that back seems to fix the problem.
>
> Thanks for looking again and figuring this out.
>
> Removing vc-ensure-vc-buffer was intentional, and it shouldn't just go
> back -- that was part of adding vc-buffer-overriding-fileset.

Yeah, I assumed it was removed for a good reason.

>                                                                What do
> you both think to something like this:
>
> diff --git a/lisp/vc/vc-annotate.el b/lisp/vc/vc-annotate.el
> index de432e4e1c3..99df932af83 100644
> --- a/lisp/vc/vc-annotate.el
> +++ b/lisp/vc/vc-annotate.el
> @@ -419,7 +419,12 @@ vc-annotate
>  		       (read-string (format-prompt "Annotate span days" 20)
>  				    nil nil "20"))))))))
>    (setq vc-annotate-display-mode display-mode) ;Not sure why.  --Stef
> -  (let* ((temp-buffer-name (format "*Annotate %s (rev %s)*" (buffer-name) rev))
> +  (let* ((file-buffer (get-file-buffer file))
> +         (temp-buffer-name (format "*Annotate %s (rev %s)*"
> +                                   (if file-buffer
> +                                       (buffer-name file-buffer)
> +                                     file)
> +                                   rev))
>           (temp-buffer-show-function 'vc-annotate-display-select)
>           ;; If BUF is specified, we presume the caller maintains current line,
>           ;; so we don't need to do it here.  This implementation may give

That works fine.  Thanks.

Steve Berman

Previous Next

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