all messages for Emacs-related lists mirrored at yhetil.org
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
To: "'Eli Zaretskii'" <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: 12908@debbugs.gnu.org, 12908-done@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#12908: 24.3.50; file `emacs_backtrace.txt'?
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 12:56:55 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <263AC1B3AE7347CEAA88A5723B1C7A7F@us.oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <837gpl49t6.fsf@gnu.org>

> > Why would Emacs insist in that case in writing a backtrace file for
> > debugging to your hard drive?
> 
> Don't ask me, I just implemented on Windows what Emacs does on GNU and
> Unix platforms.  When this was suggested, I posted a message
> describing the disadvantages of this method, see
>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2012-09/msg00501.html
>
> But the feature was implemented nonetheless.  So now it's part Emacs,
> on Unix and Windows alike.

Thanks for the background.

> > That does not seem very friendly (or useful) on the part of Emacs.
> 
> There are gobs of programs writing to your disk right now, without
> asking for your permission.  What's so unfriendly in Emacs doing the
> same?

I don't have gobs of programs writing to arbitrary directories, especially
directories with user files.  AFAIK, I have NO programs doing that.

If whether such writing is done cannot be controlled by a user (not good, IMHO),
then Emacs should at least write the information to a "hidden", more or less
"internal" directory, such as .emacs.d.

Putting this stuff willy nilly in user directories is a bad idea, IMO.  Not at
all user-friendly.  (And that's regardless of whether Emacs feels free to do
this on some other platforms.  Emacs being rude elsewhere is not a good excuse
for it to be rude on Windows too.)

> We, the Emacs maintainers, expect you to submit that file for us
> to debug the problem.
> 
> > > Users should include it with their bug reports.
> > 
> > Does my having included it in this bug report help in some way?
> > I'm guessing no, but would love to be shown wrong.
> 
> Your guess is wrong, that file includes enough information to
> understand where the crash happened, and in some cases also why.

That's good news.  Let's hope it helps fix some of the crashing problems.

> > Is the backtrace really useful for anyone in that case?  Did the
> > backtrace I included here help at all?
> 
> Yes.  Anyone with addr2line.exe can run it and recover the source file
> names and line numbers where the crash happened.

Very good.

> > Why not let users decide where the file is written, and 
> > record that directory (of the process) as part of the file
> > content (or record it elsewhere)?
> 
> Because (a) that's how Emacs works on other platforms, and
> (b) consulting Lisp when Emacs caught a fatal error is dangerous
> (could produce another fatal error).

a1. It is Emacs maintainers who decide how Emacs should work - on any platform.

a2. "That's how Emacs works" is false: It is not true in any Emacs release.  It
is true only in code under development that is being _proposed_ for release.
Hardly a "that's just how it is" precedent.

b. Why would Lisp need to be consulted?  But if there is no better alternative,
a user's choice could be recorded in a file that is read before writing
emacs_backtrace.txt.  Of course, you will perhaps say the same thing wrt opening
a file...  I realize that might be problematic.  (But at least it is not rude.)

> > Sounds like shades of Unix .core files.
> 
> It is, indeed.
> 
> > At least there are ways for users to turn off writing such coredumps
> > (and even ways to turn that off selectively, for given directories).
> 
> Which is bad for maintainers, because users then flood them with
> worthless bug reports that cannot be acted upon.

Well, one of the main reasons people prevent coredumps in Unix is that they are
costly in time & space.  That of course does not apply here.

I don't see a crying need to prevent writing these backtrace files.  I do see a
need (a courtesy to users) for letting users decide where to put them.

Or barring that possibility, at least a need to confine them to someplace under
.emacs.d.

> Please submit another bug report, which is not Windows specific
> and not about the documentation of this file.  If the general Emacs
> behavior changes, so will its behavior on Windows.

Done (#12911).  But it is you, not I, who chooses to characterizes this bug as
being about only doc and only MS Windows.  Please reread the subject line.






  reply	other threads:[~2012-11-16 20:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-11-16 18:30 bug#12908: 24.3.50; file `emacs_backtrace.txt'? Drew Adams
2012-11-16 18:40 ` Juanma Barranquero
2012-11-16 19:08   ` Drew Adams
2012-11-16 19:42     ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-16 21:02       ` Drew Adams
2012-11-17  7:23         ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-17 16:36           ` Drew Adams
2012-11-16 21:49       ` Stefan Monnier
2012-11-17  7:27         ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-16 19:00 ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-16 19:22   ` Drew Adams
2012-11-16 19:39     ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-16 20:56       ` Drew Adams [this message]
2012-11-17  7:21         ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-17 16:36           ` Drew Adams
2012-11-17 18:45 ` Paul Eggert
2012-11-17 19:09   ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-17 19:29     ` Paul Eggert
2012-11-17 19:42       ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-17 21:25         ` Paul Eggert
2012-11-17 23:08           ` bug#12911: " Drew Adams
2012-11-18  1:12             ` Paul Eggert
2012-11-18  1:19             ` bug#12911: " Paul Eggert
2012-11-18  3:55               ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-18  3:56             ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-18  4:04           ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-18  5:19             ` Paul Eggert
2012-11-18 17:16               ` bug#12911: 24.3.50; let users decide where (& perhaps whether) `emacs_backtrace.txt' files are written Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-18 19:18                 ` Paul Eggert
2012-11-18 21:10                   ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-19  1:44                     ` Stefan Monnier
2012-11-19  3:50                       ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-17 23:01     ` bug#12908: 24.3.50; file `emacs_backtrace.txt'? Drew Adams
2012-11-18  1:24       ` Paul Eggert
2012-11-18  3:58       ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-18  4:40         ` Drew Adams
2012-11-18 17:53           ` bug#12911: 24.3.50; let users decide where (& perhaps whether) `emacs_backtrace.txt' files are written Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-18 18:42             ` Drew Adams
2012-11-18  5:19         ` bug#12908: 24.3.50; file `emacs_backtrace.txt'? Paul Eggert
2012-11-18 17:08           ` bug#12911: 24.3.50; let users decide where (& perhaps whether) `emacs_backtrace.txt' files are written Eli Zaretskii
2012-11-18  7:08         ` bug#12908: 24.3.50; file `emacs_backtrace.txt'? Achim Gratz

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=263AC1B3AE7347CEAA88A5723B1C7A7F@us.oracle.com \
    --to=drew.adams@oracle.com \
    --cc=12908-done@debbugs.gnu.org \
    --cc=12908@debbugs.gnu.org \
    --cc=eliz@gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.