bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#57565: 28.1; dired cons bug


From: Harald Judt
Subject: bug#57565: 28.1; dired cons bug
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2022 21:46:49 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.13.0

Hi Eli,

Am 03.09.22 um 20:31 schrieb Eli Zaretskii:
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2022 20:21:38 +0200
From: Harald Judt <h.judt@gmx.at>

Say I do the following call to open a dired buffer and insert the files:

(dired (cons "/home/user" '("/home/user/tmp/test/a/a"
"/home/user/tmp/test/b/b" "/home/user/tmp/test/c/c")))

It works fine, I get a nice listing and can move around like expected, mark
files and try to delete them. Now it gets interesting: Usually after hitting
"x" to execute, then confirming the deletion, the buffer will refresh. But not
in this case, not when I open dired using the cons above. I can revert the
buffer using "g".

Note that when I simply do (dired "/home/user/tmp/test"), then insert the
subdir to show the files and delete them, this is not reproducible. The buffer
will be refreshed immediately after the delete operation completes.

I am reporting this bug because I have been advised to do so. Reference:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-gnu-emacs/2022-08/msg00097.html

A patch has been posted which fixes this problem:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-gnu-emacs/2022-08/msg00102.html

It would be nice to see this bug fixed.

I will install the change when the person who reported it will tell me
that it caused no problems.  I'm still waiting for that final
feedback.

Thank you for your patch and your fast response.

In fact, that was me. Testing all actions I could think of regarding deletions (locally and remotely via TRAMP scp), I have not encountered any issues so far. If I understand correctly, only deletions are affected by this, so there shouldn't be any side-effects regarding other features. Maybe there could be similar problems in other parts of the code, but so far I didn't experience anything hinting to that, and if there are, then probably they need a separate fix.

I apologize for replying so late, but I somehow missed I have been asked to report this as a bug here.

Best regards,
Harald

--
`Experience is the best teacher.'

PGP Key ID: 4FFFAB21B8580ABD
Fingerprint: E073 6DD8 FF40 9CF2 0665 11D4 4FFF AB21 B858 0ABD

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]