From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juan =?utf-8?Q?Jos=C3=A9_Garc=C3=ADa-Ripoll?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Problems with call-process (= identifying run-python issues) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 09:52:57 +0200 Message-ID: <865z9dda92.fsf@csic.es> References: <86h7t0nkiw.fsf@csic.es> <831rk4ezbu.fsf@gnu.org> <83wo1vexck.fsf@gnu.org> <865z9fggec.fsf@csic.es> <83a6yqem0x.fsf@gnu.org> <86k0xud2qe.fsf@csic.es> <83wo1ud0v2.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11671"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (windows-nt) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:BvWEgip4Zub+Hy2s8F/UsmOBwzk= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 20 09:53:37 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k8fOD-0002vt-Iv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 09:53:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48942 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k8fOC-00085s-Ky for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 03:53:36 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40402) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k8fNl-0007dW-Ip for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 03:53:09 -0400 Original-Received: from static.214.254.202.116.clients.your-server.de ([116.202.254.214]:34662 helo=ciao.gmane.io) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k8fNk-0008Ow-5h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 03:53:09 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k8fNd-0002Iq-Ox for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 09:53:01 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/08/20 03:53:03 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: 20 X-Spam_score: 2.0 X-Spam_bar: ++ X-Spam_report: (2.0 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=1, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:254045 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > It doesn't have to be "weird", it can be as simple as some antivirus > software or some other such stuff, they could be blocking or tweaking > cmd.exe invocations in some situations. (Yes, in some quarters > cmd.exe invocations are considered potential security risk.) The script gets invoked. If I add an "echo I have been executed" line, it shows in the output. That's the difference with the aspell.exe problem -- here the executable from msys2/mingw64 was broken. > It's possible to attach GDB to Emacs on Windows, yes. It may not be that complicated. I just experienced the same problem with a freshly new compiled Emacs, ran from a mingw prompt. > I actually looked at the source code involved in redirecting the > standard handles of subprocesses on Windows, and saw that if > redirection fails, Emacs should signal an error. So something morfe > subtle happens in your case. Maybe the batch file doesn't even run? As I said above, the script does get executed. I hope it's not something more complicated in the exec() code. Let's see if I can find anything -- hopefully it's not something as complicated as the Nextcloud problems... And apologies for the noise this brings to the list. Cheers, -- Juan José García Ripoll http://juanjose.garciaripoll.com http://quinfog.hbar.es