[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: address@hidden: Wrong behavior of bs-delete, bs-delete-backward if b
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: address@hidden: Wrong behavior of bs-delete, bs-delete-backward if buffer is not actually killed] |
Date: |
Sun, 18 Nov 2001 09:56:18 +0200 (IST) |
On Sat, 17 Nov 2001, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> I think you misunderstood. The last patch he sent, which only
> changes the (kill-buffer ...) to (unless (kill-buffer ...) (error ...))
> is the whole patch.
>
> It clearly doesn't require any papers,
>
>
> Stefan "who seem to have deleted that email already"
I still have it, if someone needs it.
Of course, emacs-devel is archived by mailman, so anyone should be
able to find it in the archives
(http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel).
- address@hidden: Wrong behavior of bs-delete, bs-delete-backward if buffer is not actually killed], Richard Stallman, 2001/11/16
- Re: address@hidden: Wrong behavior of bs-delete, bs-delete-backward if buffer is not actually killed], Stefan Monnier, 2001/11/16
- Re: address@hidden: Wrong behavior of bs-delete, bs-delete-backward if buffer is not actually killed], Juanma Barranquero, 2001/11/16
- Re: address@hidden: Wrong behavior of bs-delete, bs-delete-backward if buffer is not actually killed], Stefan Monnier, 2001/11/16
- Re: address@hidden: Wrong behavior of bs-delete, bs-delete-backward if buffer is not actually killed], Juanma Barranquero, 2001/11/16
- Re: address@hidden: Wrong behavior of bs-delete, bs-delete-backward if buffer is not actually killed], Richard Stallman, 2001/11/17
- Re: address@hidden: Wrong behavior of bs-delete, bs-delete-backward if buffer is not actually killed], Richard Stallman, 2001/11/17
- Re: address@hidden: Wrong behavior of bs-delete, bs-delete-backward if buffer is not actually killed], Stefan Monnier, 2001/11/17
- Re: address@hidden: Wrong behavior of bs-delete, bs-delete-backward if buffer is not actually killed],
Eli Zaretskii <=