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#16691: 24.3.50; emacs_backtrace.txt Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2014 18:30:10 +0200 Message-ID: <83lhxkuu3x.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83a9e1wg93.fsf@gnu.org> <52F68E36.7070204@gmx.at> <83zjm1uz1g.fsf@gnu.org> <52F760B0.6050003@gmx.at> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1391963470 14268 80.91.229.3 (9 Feb 2014 16:31:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2014 16:31:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 16691@debbugs.gnu.org, lekktu@gmail.com To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 09 17:31:16 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 1WCXHn-0001s0-I9 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 17:31:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51377 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WCXHm-0002E9-Ry for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 11:31:14 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35266) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WCXHf-0002Dz-NP for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 11:31:12 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WCXHb-0003ns-6x for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 11:31:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:46697) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WCXHb-0003no-4H for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 11:31:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WCXHa-0004Sx-Ex for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Feb 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: Sun, 09 Feb 2014 16:31:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 16691 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 16691-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B16691.139196343617111 (code B ref 16691); Sun, 09 Feb 2014 16:31:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 16691) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Feb 2014 16:30:36 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60713 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WCXH6-0004Rs-Ie for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 11:30:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:50590) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WCXH3-0004Ri-FK for 16691@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 11:30:30 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N0Q00000LSTNF00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for 16691@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 18:30:28 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N0Q000HLLURK710@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 18:30:28 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <52F760B0.6050003@gmx.at> 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:85088 Archived-At: > Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2014 12:04:16 +0100 > From: martin rudalics > CC: lekktu@gmail.com, drew.adams@oracle.com, 16691@debbugs.gnu.org > > > As to how this could happen: did any of your changes affect the 'used' > > field of the glyph_row structure, under any circumstances? > > I don't understand the glyph_row structure and hopefully never ever have > touched it. The only possibly related change is that of re-introducing > an adjust_window_margins call in window_resize_apply in revision 116307, > but this happened clearly after Bug#16660. OK, thanks for checking.