Re: *emacs vs. MacFUSE/sshfs

[YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu]

>>>>> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:07:33 +0100, David Reitter 
>>>>> <david.reitter@gmail.com> said:

> I think this would have to be addressed on the Emacs level. I'm
> cc'ing the Emacs Bugs list.

> PS.: You could use Tramp for the time being.

> On 26 Jul 2007, at 15:23, Bill McGonigle wrote:

> Just sending along a pointer to a bug report at Google that affects
> Aquamacs:

>     http://code.google.com/p/macfuse/issues/detail?id=214#c7

> There appears to be a work-around that can be implemented in
> MacFUSE, but it also appears emacs is aggressive/optimistic, and
> this might affect other filesystems, not just MacFUSE-based ones.

Could you explain more about "it appears emacs is
aggressive/optimistic"?  In the Carbon port, the SIGALRM duration is 2
seconds by default and it's not too frequent.  If some file operation
takes much more time than that period, then it is desirable that it
works with signals so users/applications can interrupt the long
operation, IMO.

> A different duration for the alarm signal might make sense on the
> Mac.

You can set it via `polling-period' if you need.

What kind of change on the Emacs side are the MacFUSE developers
suggesting?

                                     YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
                                mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp