From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#35328: 27.0.50; Lisp reference, "Accepting Output": Should describe what happens to standard error Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 12:26:34 +0300 Message-ID: <8336ma8k6t.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83k1fpb15c.fsf@gnu.org> <83tver896c.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="76516"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: 35328@debbugs.gnu.org To: Philipp Stephani Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 22 11:27:15 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hIVEE-000JgG-PD for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 11:27:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34629 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hIVED-0002Fw-RZ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 05:27:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:49487) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hIVE7-0002FD-UG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 05:27:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hIVE6-0003EP-Uo for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 05:27:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:36153) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hIVE6-0003EL-S0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 05:27:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hIVE6-00054B-ON for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 05:27:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 09:27:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 35328 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 35328-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B35328.155592521219448 (code B ref 35328); Mon, 22 Apr 2019 09:27:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 35328) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Apr 2019 09:26:52 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49695 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hIVDv-00053c-EW for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 05:26:51 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:34993) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hIVDt-00053O-3N for 35328@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 05:26:49 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:37790) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hIVDn-0002yO-VQ; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 05:26:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4847 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1hIVDm-0003c9-UY; Mon, 22 Apr 2019 05:26:43 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Philipp Stephani on Mon, 22 Apr 2019 11:14:19 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:157996 Archived-At: > From: Philipp Stephani > Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 11:14:19 +0200 > Cc: 35328@debbugs.gnu.org > > > Well, it says "output", not "standard output". I take it to mean both > > output streams. If the text is interpreted to mean both streams, is > > it accurate? > > I don't think so. At least empirically one has to wait for the > standard error process separately to ensure that all standard error is > read. I've sent a patch to extend the documentation to say that, is > that ok? Yes, modulo my minor comments there. Thanks.