[Rd] behaviour of bug.report (PR#432)
Fri, 11 Feb 2000 21:35:53 +0800 (WST)
>>>>> "FL" == Friedrich Leisch <Friedrich.Leisch@ci.tuwien.ac.at> writes:
>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2000 13:09:31 +0100 (MET),
>>>>> berwin (b) wrote:
b> To my surprise, I then noticed that the empty template was send
b> and not the report. I gues the "real" report was only in the
b> buffer and never written back to the file R.bug.report. But I
b> kind of wonder whether emacs or R is to blame for this
FL> Hmm, I don't want to ask the obvious ... but: You did save the
FL> file before pressing `C-x #'? My emacs asks when I try to leave
FL> an gnuclient buffer without saving, but as every feature in
FL> eamcs can be re-configured ...
As far as I remember, I did not save the file before pressing `C-x #'.
But then, I also did not change the buffer, so I was not asked whether
I wanted to save the file after pressing `C-x #'. That's why I made
sure that I modified the buffer on my next attempt.
I guess the following happened:
1) bug.report created the standard template in the file R.bug.report
and called emacsclient.
2) emacsclient noticed that the content of the file on the disk
differed from the content of the R.bug.report buffer and asked me
whether I wanted to revert to the version on the disk. To this I
stated no. But the content of the buffer was not saved into the file.
3) I saw the buffer with the text that I wanted to send and entered
`C-x #'. Since the buffer hadn't be modified, emacs does not ask
whether you want to save it too the file and just exists.
4) bug.report asks whether you want to mail the bug report and on
answering `yes' mails the file R.bug.report which is on the disk.
In this case the empty template.
This description kind of convinces me that every part worked as it was
designed to do, it's just that it gave a rather unexpected result....
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !) To: email@example.com