From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs does not listen on w32 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 08:44:52 +0200 Message-ID: <4802FD64.1080602@gmail.com> References: <4800D965.9080202@gmail.com> <480208C8.3030401@gnu.org> <480212F7.7090409@gmail.com> <4802249D.2060909@gmail.com> <480271D2.7040304@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1208155514 11120 80.91.229.12 (14 Apr 2008 06:45:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 06:45:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , jasonr@gnu.org, Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 14 08:45:52 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JlIRr-0003Xr-6r for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 08:45:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JlIRD-0000tl-1G for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 02:45:11 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JlIR9-0000ss-LX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 02:45:07 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JlIR7-0000sJ-9p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 02:45:06 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JlIR7-0000sC-2H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 02:45:05 -0400 Original-Received: from ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.212]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JlIQz-0002T5-AX; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 02:44:57 -0400 Original-Received: from c83-254-150-27.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.150.27]:65333 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JlIQw-0002gy-5X; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 08:44:54 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 In-Reply-To: X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080414-0, 2008-04-14), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Originating-IP: 83.254.150.27 X-ACL-Warn: Too high rate of unknown addresses received from you X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1JlIQw-0002gy-5X. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net 1JlIQw-0002gy-5X f40a138e6cb491d82169684643e0dd41 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:95162 Archived-At: Juanma Barranquero wrote: >> In any case, the first >> thing to do is to figure out what *really* happened in the first place. >> We don't even know why Emacs didn't respond. Maybe it has nothing to do >> with the processing of WM_CLOSE. > > I don't think the problem was related to WM_CLOSE. What you suggested > is much more likely: a memory leak. Windows tends to be *extremely* > unresponsive on low-memory situations. I think you and Stefan are right about the memory problem but that there are two different problems. In response to Eli's message I tested a simple loop, something like (let (x y) (while (not x) (setq y (current-time-string)) (when (string= y "something") (setq x t)))) Running this Emacs does not hang the pc, but it still does not answer when clicking the [X]. (I could kill it with C-g here though.) > My answering to Lennart is because he's trying to hack around a > probable bug by pushing for a half-cooked idea, when a combination of > (the Windows equivalent of) kill -9 and gdb would be more appropriate > :) > > Juanma >