Re: "M-x locate" regression

[Nick Roberts]

 >    For this reason, I think its important that find-dired can add to
 >    dired-buffers.
 > 
 > If I understood correctly, this requires reverting an old change by
 > Richard.  In that case, Richard should tell us whether that is OK or
 > not.  Also did you check that the way you want to do it works
 > correctly if you delete a file whose directory is not the *Find*
 > buffer's directory, but a subdirectory of it, that is, a file listed
 > as subdir/filename?

I've just created such a buffer, deleted the file in a buffer using
normal dired and the *Find* buffer updates correctly.  I've not done
an exhaustive analysis but using dired-buffers seems to follow the idiom.

 >    delete-region could be used for locate, of course,
 > 
 > I guess one could also make dired-fun-in-all-buffers automatically
 > check all *Locate* buffers, so that *Locate* buffers would also be
 > updated, even if the file got deleted in another Dired buffer.  But
 > maybe that might be more complicated.

*Locate* differs from *Find* in that it has its own mode and doesn't
use dired-mode but copies the keymap.  I'm not sure that the dired analogy
carries over so fully.  It uses absolute filenames for a start.


 >     possibly conditioned on major-mode not being dired-mode to make
 >    sure nothing gets deleted twice.
 > 
 > I do not believe that my patch deletes anything twice.
 > dired-fun-in-all-buffers can not delete anything that is not there any more.

Probably not but theres no harm in conditioning it, and it might make it more
future proof.  Actually requiring major-mode to be locate-mode would also
explain when it was needed better perhaps than a comment could.

Nick