From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Dokos Subject: Re: org-mobile-push: Non-existent .#flagged.org angenda - how to avoid this message? Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 13:52:56 -0400 Message-ID: <878umsgttz.fsf@alphaville.bos.redhat.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39970) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XHcje-0003dM-Qf for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 13:53:25 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XHcjW-0003sk-Fn for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 13:53:18 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:39678) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XHcjW-0003se-9p for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 13:53:10 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XHcjU-0002uG-7l for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 19:53:08 +0200 Received: from nat-pool-bos-t.redhat.com ([66.187.233.206]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 19:53:08 +0200 Received: from ndokos by nat-pool-bos-t.redhat.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 19:53:08 +0200 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Shavkat Rustamov writes: > When calling org-mobile-push, org gives this message "Non-existing agenda file .#flagged.org". > > .# are lock files (create-lockfiles variable), which get created in the org directory. I would prefer to have them. Maybe org-mobile-files-exclude-regexp can help. Something like (setq org-mobile-files-exclude-regexp "\\.\\#.*") I don't use MobileOrg, so this is completely untested, and even if it works, the regexp can probably be improved. -- Nick