Re: emacsclient horribly broken

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 11/2/06, Tim Van Holder <address@hidden> wrote:

> I assume it either figured "server already running, no problem", or
> just created a new socket.

OK, I see Stefan has sent a patch for it.

> OK, I see - I discounted remote access because emacs saves the server info
> locally anyway - I kind of assumed it would bind to the loopback
> interface, which
> would avoid most of the security issues anyway.

It binds to the loopback interface; but you can customize it to use any IP.

> But if emacsclient then tried in sequence
> - the serverfile specified on the command line
> - or, if local sockets are supported, the first such connected socket (if any)
> - or, if the default server file exists, the tcp socket it references
> then both goals would be met - local sockets get precedence, and my TCP
> setup is transparently handled as well. In addition, for remote TCP connections,
> emacsclient could emit a warning "connecting to emacs running on <machine>
> (port <port>), possibly requiring an extra keystroke to confirm.

I'll take a stab at implementing it.

> In any case, I don't use emacsclient a great deal, I typically just
> operate from a
> single emacs instance on our development box, so I'm not exactly your core
> audience :-)

I'm not *my* core audience: I use emacsclient, but always locally. :)

                   /L/e/k/t/u