bug#35495: 27.0.50; Untarring an archive with a keyring.gpg inside

[Stefan Monnier]

>> > It isn't clear to me how you distinguish between the file-name
>> > handlers that should and shouldn't be disabled here.
>> Each file-name handler will make that decision on its own.
> Will each handler also write code to implement that decision?

Well, the handler will execute code rather than write it, but yes,
someone will have to change jka and epa to implement this new behavior
of write-region.

> If so, we can stop being bothered by that issue.  But if someone of us
> will have to implement that decision, the question still stands,
> doesn't it?

Hmm... I think you're referring to the question of what this new
"write-region-provides-raw-file-contents" should precisely mean, so that
maintainers of file-name-handlers can decide how to implement it.

Here's one attempt: "the data provided to write-region reflects the actual
bytes that should be placed into the file rather than the data returned
by `insert-file-contents`".

Maybe another way to define it would be: "the data provided to
write-region reflects the data one would like to get from
`insert-file-contents-literally` rather than that returned by
`insert-file-contents`"

And that made me discover that we have another occurrence of the same
problem in `insert-file-contents-literally`:

    (defun insert-file-contents-literally (filename &optional visit beg end 
replace)
      "Like `insert-file-contents', but only reads in the file literally.
    See `insert-file-contents' for an explanation of the parameters.
    A buffer may be modified in several ways after reading into the buffer,
    due to Emacs features such as format decoding, character code
    conversion, `find-file-hook', automatic uncompression, etc.
    
    This function ensures that none of these modifications will take place."
      (let ((format-alist nil)
            (after-insert-file-functions nil)
            (coding-system-for-read 'no-conversion)
            (coding-system-for-write 'no-conversion)
            (inhibit-file-name-handlers
             ;; FIXME: Yuck!!  We should turn insert-file-contents-literally
             ;; into a file operation instead!
             (append '(jka-compr-handler image-file-handler epa-file-handler)
                     (and (eq inhibit-file-name-operation 'insert-file-contents)
                          inhibit-file-name-handlers)))
            (inhibit-file-name-operation 'insert-file-contents))
        (insert-file-contents filename visit beg end replace)))

So this FIXME suggests maybe we should introduce a new file operation
`write-region-literally`?


        Stefan