From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#16504: 24.3.50; emacs_backtrace.txt Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 18:30:01 +0200 Message-ID: <838uuaipkm.fsf@gnu.org> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1390235511 30168 80.91.229.3 (20 Jan 2014 16:31:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 16:31:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 16504@debbugs.gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 20 17:31:57 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1W5HlU-00026Y-79 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 17:31:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53337 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W5HlT-0008BU-R5 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:31:55 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57798) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W5Hki-0006ze-Tx for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:31:15 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W5Hkd-0006qH-32 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:31:08 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:44513) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W5Hkd-0006qD-0N for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:31:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1W5Hkc-0006V1-HW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:31:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 16:31:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 16504 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 16504-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B16504.139023542024918 (code B ref 16504); Mon, 20 Jan 2014 16:31:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 16504) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jan 2014 16:30:20 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58532 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1W5Hju-0006Tn-JF for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:30:19 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:41733) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1W5Hjs-0006Td-11 for 16504@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:30:16 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MZP00800KFSX000@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for 16504@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 18:29:53 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MZP008ASKHSIVA0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 18:29:53 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:83786 Archived-At: > From: Juanma Barranquero > Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 13:05:46 +0100 > Cc: 16504@debbugs.gnu.org > > FWIW, with that same binary I don't get a crash Neither do I with today's trunk. I guess this has something to do with which fonts are installed on the system. > though there's obviously a bug in that an invalid font shouldn't be > accepted (see attached image). I think the font is valid (it does succeed to display the buffer), it's just that it doesn't have a bold variant, which is needed to display the buffer name on the mode line.