[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user")
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user") |
Date: |
Tue, 03 Mar 2015 20:09:56 +0200 |
> From: Michal Nazarewicz <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
> Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 18:48:24 +0100
>
> > It's a lie, and one that's tricky to untangle: you need to know that
> > to get a _real_ file name, you need to run it through
> > expand-file-name. If you don't, things will subtly fail, e.g., if you
> > compare this with some other file name.
>
> This is already a problem on *all* systems and it happens if user init
> file is not found. If you run ‘emacs -u foo’ on GNU/Linux, you’ll end
> up with `user-init-file" equal to "~foo/.emacs".
I don't understand how what you say is a contradiction to what I said.
> > Another important piece of the puzzle is that if USER is not
> > recognized as a valid user by the getpwnam emulation on
> > MS-Windows/MS-DOS, you get this:
> >
> > (expand-file-name "~USER") => /current/directory/~USER
> >
> > And it is possible to have a literal "~USER" directory, in which case
> > the warning will be incorrectly skipped.
>
> This also happens on UNIX-like systems.
Of course, it does. So what?
> Based on all that, I think the most consistent option is to:
>
> 1) always check if ~USER/ directory exists for the ‘User foo has no home
> directory’ warning;
>
> 2) user ~USER/.emacs and ~USER/_emacs on MS-Windows; and
>
> 3) use `expand-file-name' when setting `user-init-file' if init file has
> not been loaded.
Sorry, I cannot follow the logic that led to these 3 conclusions.
Please explain. (And don't we already do all that?)
> The below untested patch does that plus stops Emacs from attempting to
> load init file if `init-file-user' is ‘invalid’, i.e. contains ~, /, :
> or \n.
Why?
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"), Michal Nazarewicz, 2015/03/02
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"), Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/02
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"), Michal Nazarewicz, 2015/03/02
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"), Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/03
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"), Michal Nazarewicz, 2015/03/03
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"),
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"), Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/03
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"), Pete Williamson, 2015/03/03
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"), Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/03
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"), Pete Williamson, 2015/03/03
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"), Michal Nazarewicz, 2015/03/03
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"), Michal Nazarewicz, 2015/03/03
- Re: [PATCH] for review - Allow expansion of "~" (as opposed to "~user"), Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/04