> > Could you provide a self-contained description of what the issue is? > > I don't know what's to cover that hasn't already been said: > > I didn't ask for anything that hasn't already been said. > I asked for a self-contained description of what has been said.
The thread is only about two days old. > I cannot remember the reason in 1998 for binding dired-buffers. But > it looks like the goal was to prevent these find-dired buffers from > being included in that list. Probably because there was something > that did not work right if they were included in that list. I can guess that much. > Perhaps the thing that did not work is what you are fixing now. I'm not fixing anything for *Find* buffers, as Luc says, I'm proposing to revert your change. However, _after_ your change dired-internal-do-deletions was changed to use dired-buffers through dired-fun-in-all-buffers (so that all dired buffers got updated). This change was also made by you, but four years later (14-Mar-02). I think my change won't make things worse, probably better. If it's wrong, and people are using it, that presumably should get picked up in the pretest. Shall I install my patch? Nick _______________________________________________ Emacs-pretest-bug mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
