From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: daniel@bigwalter.net (Daniel Jensen) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Echoing of keys and process I/O Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:33:13 +0100 Message-ID: <87tzx3d2ra.fsf@orme.bigwalter.net> References: <87odnigv69.fsf@orme.bigwalter.net> <877iu3zgvn.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87slcqi61m.fsf@orme.bigwalter.net> <87r6saur44.fsf@stupidchicken.com> Reply-To: indiscipline@gmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1172853445 15535 80.91.229.12 (2 Mar 2007 16:37:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 16:37:25 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 02 17:37:15 2007 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 1HNAks-0006NI-QF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:37:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HNAks-0000lX-6s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 11:37:14 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HNAkg-0000l9-7L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 11:37:02 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HNAke-0000kx-EA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 11:37:01 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HNAke-0000ku-8G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 11:37:00 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1HNAkd-0001o9-Ge for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 11:37:00 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HNAk5-00049b-7I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:36:25 +0100 Original-Received: from 217-211-191-67-no39.tbcn.telia.com ([217.211.191.67]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:36:25 +0100 Original-Received: from indiscipline by 217-211-191-67-no39.tbcn.telia.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:36:25 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 24 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 217-211-191-67-no39.tbcn.telia.com X-Face: SNGmwsN&0DaHhS0!*%\@y"Wc^).,<; VsqY#}K/NJ:A Z6_>Md7x$Z9C1%BAu41M'12-8(f2{H*8OsnYv,K+y.szl1K>}{uC/>2?; k[KUiD=$}@z>odk|7Tk7i $A|{j7LhTt!:SdVp5Z, kKA247}--"-QLedxCbw|#&bh=R]Rd)kx{q+T'fG)9ayG`+\@g'3vx1Fd3bl -`3}Guvr!A"Z);"$|]CXW>YR5m"<[L Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.0.93 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:y+tc/F40vs2HVBcqm69lAm2XUlA= X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:67227 Archived-At: Chong Yidong writes: > daniel@bigwalter.net (Daniel Jensen) writes: > >> I have experimented some more with different versions of Emacs, >> including one built from the latest CVS sources (i686-pc-linux-gnu), >> and I have now found one way to avoid this echo area blocking: All is >> well while I'm using Emacs 22 in a virtual terminal. >> >> I still see the bug when I'm in X, even with an Emacs without X >> support running in an xterm. It's the same on several GNU/Linux >> systems, so I don't think I have misconfigured something. > > I don't see the bug when I'm in X, on my GNU/Linux laptop. If you > could post a detailed recipe, maybe that will help. Thanks for taking the time to look at this. Unfortunately, I have no idea what's going on here. I cannot describe many details regarding the problem. It seems to me that a process filter and/or process-send-string will make this bug visible. The shell mode test was the easiest I could think of, it uses a comint filter. If you can't reproduce the bug with this, I don't know how to go with it.