From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: sendmail.el bug or expected behavior?
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:50:28 -0500
Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org
Message-ID: <E1AlYI8-0005oY-Db@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <877jzn2lk8.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org>
	<E1AjEYN-0001wf-Gx@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<ilun08hnd7y.fsf@latte.josefsson.org>
	<E1Ajk4L-0005Zz-CO@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<iluwu7j7qbv.fsf@latte.josefsson.org>
	<E1Ak60D-0000DZ-K9@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<ilu1xpqzf0q.fsf@latte.josefsson.org>
	<16405.8086.195634.248486@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
	<ilu3ca2k7ej.fsf@latte.josefsson.org>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1075229670 31759 80.91.224.253 (27 Jan 2004 18:54:30 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:54:30 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 27 19:54:24 2004
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1AlYLw-0005Mb-00
	for <emacs-devel@deer.gmane.org>; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 19:54:24 +0100
Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1AlYLv-0002IZ-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 19:54:24 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24)
	id 1AlYKW-0006se-1u
	for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:52:56 -0500
Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24)
	id 1AlYK5-0006nS-Pc
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:52:29 -0500
Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24)
	id 1AlYIh-00063u-WF
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:51:36 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AlYIg-00062g-TM
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:51:02 -0500
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.24)
	id 1AlYI8-0005oY-Db; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:50:28 -0500
Original-To: Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com>
In-reply-to: <ilu3ca2k7ej.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> (message from Simon
	Josefsson on Mon, 26 Jan 2004 17:21:24 +0100)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2
Precedence: list
List-Id: Emacs development discussions.  <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:19513
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:19513

    I think all of these cases can be detected, without negatively
    affecting proper operation, by using start-process instead of
    call-process with BUFFER=0.

I expect that would be slower in the usual case, and I don't want to
pay such a price.

      The code would spawn the process, poll
    the process for, e.g., 1 second, and if it is still running, continue.

    (setq foo (start-process ...))
    (sit-for 1)

A one-second delay is absolutely unacceptable.

If you can implement this method without any appreciable slowdown,
then I have no objection to switching to it.