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

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

bug#4197: 23.1; error when try to run `server-start': directory .emacs.d


From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: bug#4197: 23.1; error when try to run `server-start': directory .emacs.d/server is unsafe
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:28:44 +0300

> From: "Drew Adams" <address@hidden>
> Cc: <address@hidden>, <address@hidden>
> Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 11:12:16 -0700
> 
> OK, but FAT32 is very common. I wonder about the default for the variable 
> being
> non-nil, even after the bug is fixed, but especially before then.

The variable does more than just influence server.el.  It makes
file-attributes more accurate, which has its own benefits, most
prominently in Dired.

> > Can you perhaps convert the drive to NTFS?
> 
> No. Is it a joke?

No, I tried to help you work around the problem (and get a better
filesystem while at that).

> This is not my personal laptop. This is the standard issue for my
> company.

I couldn't know that, could I?

> I think Emacs should be able to coexist and behave nicely with FAT32 - don't
> you?

I do, and it does -- mostly.

> It doesn't make sense to make the default behavior dependent on assuming that
> users do not have FAT32 and are not in the local Administrators group. IMO.
> That's a crippling assumption.

The code in server.el assumes a Posix filesystem.  We are trying to
get it to work nicely on Windows, when some of these assumptions don't
hold.  IOW, no one specifically assumed users do not have FAT32.

> Beyond the message text, what does it mean? Where is this notion of "unsafe
> directory" documented in the manuals?

It is a more or less common knowledge in the Posix world.  But I do
agree that the message text should be more self-explanatory.

> I think this should be explained in the manual(s) - we shouldn't simply 
> improve
> the message (though that too should be done). It is especially important to
> document things that concern safety (if this really does).

If the message is explicit enough, it will explain itself.





reply via email to

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