[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: desktop
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: desktop |
Date: |
Mon, 18 Aug 2003 00:52:14 -0400 |
> (desktop-load-default)
> (desktop-read)
> (setq desktop-enable t)
>
>
To me this sound as the best solution because it is simpler.
It is simple, but inconvenient for the user.
Is there any situation in which the user benefits from
having desktop-enable be nil? Do users want that mode of
operation? If not, we could just make desktop-enable t by default.
Why not?
- desktop, Alex Schroeder, 2003/08/15
- Re: desktop, Lars Hansen, 2003/08/16
- Re: desktop and misc.texi, Alex Schroeder, 2003/08/16
- Re: desktop,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: desktop, Lars Hansen, 2003/08/18
- Re: desktop, Miles Bader, 2003/08/18
- Re: desktop, Alex Schroeder, 2003/08/18
- Re: desktop, Miles Bader, 2003/08/19
- Re: desktop, Lars Hansen, 2003/08/19
- Re: desktop, Richard Stallman, 2003/08/20
- Message not available
- Re: desktop, Richard Stallman, 2003/08/21
- Re: desktop, Lars Hansen, 2003/08/22
- Re: desktop, Alex Schroeder, 2003/08/22
- Re: desktop, Richard Stallman, 2003/08/23