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#4426: [PATCH] posn-at-point returns an incorrect value Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2011 13:01:06 +0200 Message-ID: <83zkhbeoi5.fsf@gnu.org> References: <4BA05437.8000303@yahoo.co.jp> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1318071722 13748 80.91.229.12 (8 Oct 2011 11:02:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 11:02:02 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 4426-done@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 08 13:01:58 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RCUfC-0003g1-W6 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Oct 2011 13:01:55 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45341 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RCUfC-0008F8-J5 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Oct 2011 07:01:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:46277) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RCUf6-0008E9-QE for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Oct 2011 07:01:52 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RCUf2-0002CQ-C1 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Oct 2011 07:01:48 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:48631) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RCUf2-0002CM-4a for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Oct 2011 07:01:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RCUfL-0007Do-6b for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Oct 2011 07:02:03 -0400 Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2011 11:02:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 4426 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Mail-Followup-To: 4426@debbugs.gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org Original-Received: via spool by 4426-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D4426.131807169327722 (code D ref 4426); Sat, 08 Oct 2011 11:02:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 4426-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Oct 2011 11:01:33 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RCUer-0007D5-4o for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 Oct 2011 07:01:33 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il ([80.179.55.169]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RCUen-0007Cm-9P for 4426-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 Oct 2011 07:01:30 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LSQ00100UI8BK00@a-mtaout21.012.net.il> for 4426-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 Oct 2011 13:01:03 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.124.91.138]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LSQ000ZUULPB180@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Sat, 08 Oct 2011 13:01:03 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2011 07:02:03 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) 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:52416 Archived-At: > From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen > Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 10:21:43 +0200 > Cc: 4426@debbugs.gnu.org > > As far as I can tell, this patch hasn't been applied yet. I'm not > familiar enough with this code to say whether this looks correct or > not. Could someone take a look? I took a look. The problem indeed was still there. I installed a fix (slightly different from what the OP suggested). Thanks.