From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Strange entries in xbacktrace Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2012 19:45:52 +0200 Message-ID: <83391ze75b.fsf@gnu.org> References: <831uhkg4qe.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1349027153 26192 80.91.229.3 (30 Sep 2012 17:45:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2012 17:45:53 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 30 19:45:59 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1TINaZ-0004SX-7u for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2012 19:45:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41421 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TINaT-0003mp-SP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2012 13:45:53 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43390) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TINaR-0003mh-Na for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2012 13:45:52 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TINaQ-0004Zl-NA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2012 13:45:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:56045) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TINaQ-0004ZZ-CE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2012 13:45:50 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MB600500BANL200@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2012 19:45:48 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MB6005HKC0C6390@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2012 19:45:48 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <831uhkg4qe.fsf@gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.172 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:153765 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2012 18:42:49 +0200 > From: Eli Zaretskii > > Since today (or maybe yesterday), I sometimes see strange entries in > the Lisp backtrace. Like this, for example: > > Lisp Backtrace: > 0xb6110000 Lisp type 0 > > Is this expected? If so, how to interpret these? Sounds like a bug, because I now get Lisp Backtrace: 0x90310000 Lisp type 0 0xb2890000 Lisp type 0 0xaf790000 Lisp type 0 0x17190000 Lisp type 0 0x6dd10000 Lisp type 0 0x6f110000 Lisp type 0 0x15890360 Lisp type 4 0x81910000 Lisp type 0 where I should have seen a real Lisp backtrace, judging by the C backtrace: #5 0x0111bde9 in Fvertical_motion (lines=4, window=55121741) at indent.c:2063 #6 0x01015107 in Ffuncall (nargs=2, args=0x82ec04) at eval.c:2775 #7 0x0112585f in exec_byte_code (bytestr=20756017, vector=20756157, maxdepth=20, args_template=55060506, nargs=0, args=0x0) at bytecode.c:899 #8 0x01015fc9 in funcall_lambda (fun=20755981, nargs=2, arg_vector=0x82ee68) at eval.c:3004 #9 0x010154a3 in Ffuncall (nargs=3, args=0x82ee64) at eval.c:2821 #10 0x0112585f in exec_byte_code (bytestr=20755745, vector=20755853, maxdepth=16, args_template=55060506, nargs=0, args=0x0) at bytecode.c:899 #11 0x01015fc9 in funcall_lambda (fun=20755693, nargs=4, arg_vector=0x82f0c8) at eval.c:3004 #12 0x010154a3 in Ffuncall (nargs=5, args=0x82f0c4) at eval.c:2821 #13 0x0112585f in exec_byte_code (bytestr=20754401, vector=20754493, maxdepth=24, args_template=55060506, nargs=0, args=0x0) at bytecode.c:899 #14 0x01015fc9 in funcall_lambda (fun=20754349, nargs=0, arg_vector=0x82f290) at eval.c:3004 #15 0x010157db in apply_lambda (fun=20754349, args=55060506) at eval.c:2881 #16 0x010137b2 in eval_sub (form=59011630) at eval.c:2182 #17 0x0100f137 in Fprogn (args=59011622) at eval.c:359 #18 0x01012f24 in eval_sub (form=59011806) at eval.c:2085 #19 0x01012a86 in Feval (form=59011806, lexical=55060506) at eval.c:2002 #20 0x01015107 in Ffuncall (nargs=3, args=0x82f644) at eval.c:2775 #21 0x0112585f in exec_byte_code (bytestr=20723729, vector=20723845, maxdepth=20, args_template=55060506, nargs=0, args=0x0) at bytecode.c:899 #22 0x01015fc9 in funcall_lambda (fun=20723677, nargs=2, arg_vector=0x82f8a4) at eval.c:3004 #23 0x010154a3 in Ffuncall (nargs=3, args=0x82f8a0) at eval.c:2821 #24 0x01014296 in Fapply (nargs=2, args=0x82f940) at eval.c:2306 #25 0x0101481a in apply1 (fn=56823810, arg=59011246) at eval.c:2540 #26 0x01122a9e in Fcall_interactively (function=56823810, record_flag=55060506, keys=55081901) at callint.c:377 #27 0x0101517c in Ffuncall (nargs=4, args=0x82fb80) at eval.c:2779