From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ken Brown Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#9754: Issue with Emacs 23.4 Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 14:26:42 -0400 Message-ID: <4FB542E2.7020304@cornell.edu> References: <4FAC34DA.7040606@cs.ucla.edu> <4FB2A9C7.3070604@cornell.edu> <4FB2CFF9.70309@cs.ucla.edu> <4FB2D8AB.7030401@cornell.edu> <878vgsrpoh.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <4FB4DB2D.7040100@cornell.edu> <4FB4F27B.40508@cornell.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1337279337 23700 80.91.229.3 (17 May 2012 18:28:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 18:28:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 9754@debbugs.gnu.org, Achim Gratz , Paul Eggert To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu May 17 20:28:56 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1SV5RX-0003kB-8A for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 17 May 2012 20:28:55 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50444 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SV5RW-0002ok-Je for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 17 May 2012 14:28:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49493) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SV5RT-0002oO-6t for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 17 May 2012 14:28:52 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SV5RN-0006jF-W5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 17 May 2012 14:28:50 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:50084) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SV5RN-0006j9-Sq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 17 May 2012 14:28:45 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SV5Re-000628-0B for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 17 May 2012 14:29:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Ken Brown Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 18:29:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 9754 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 9754-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B9754.133727928423123 (code B ref 9754); Thu, 17 May 2012 18:29:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9754) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 May 2012 18:28:04 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59630 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SV5Qi-00060u-9K for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 17 May 2012 14:28:04 -0400 Original-Received: from limestone3.mail.cornell.edu ([128.253.83.163]:59977) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SV5QN-000607-TQ for 9754@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 17 May 2012 14:28:02 -0400 X-CornellRouted: This message has been Routed already. Original-Received: from alva02.serverfarm.cornell.edu (alva02.serverfarm.cornell.edu [128.84.106.39]) by limestone3.mail.cornell.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q4HIRAd5025779; Thu, 17 May 2012 14:27:10 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from localhost.localdomain (pawpaw.mail.cornell.edu [128.253.83.170]) by alva02.serverfarm.cornell.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q4HIRDWL018757; Thu, 17 May 2012 14:27:13 -0400 Original-Received: from pawpaw.mail.cornell.edu by pawpaw.mail.cornell.edu with queue id 205618147-6; Thu, 17 May 2012 18:26:52 GMT Original-Received: from [192.168.1.4] (cpe-67-249-194-47.twcny.res.rr.com [67.249.194.47]) by with SMTP id ; Thu, 17 May 2012 18:26:52 GMT (envelope-from kbrown@cornell.edu) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 In-Reply-To: X-PMX-CORNELL-SPAM-CHECKED: Pawpaw X-PMX-Version: 5.5.9.395186, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2012.5.17.181819 X-Original-Sender: kbrown@cornell.edu - Thu May 17 14:26:53 2012 X-PMX-CORNELL-REASON: CU_White_List_Override X-PMX-CORNELL: Alva02 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:60145 Archived-At: On 5/17/2012 11:02 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >>> So maybe the test >>> if (inhibit_window_system || !display_arg) >>> in my patch should be replaced by >>> if (!x_in_use) > > Maybe. As I said, I'm not familiar enough with that code to really know > what are the consequences, I just mentioned a few potential problems > (without even knowing whether they're real). > > So unless someone more knowledgeable can confirm that the patch is > "obviously safe" I don't want to see it in the emacs-24 branch. I understand, and I'm no longer proposing the patch for the emacs-24 branch. My question is about what should be done in the trunk. It seems to me that it would be better to use x_in_use, and I'm wondering if knowledgeable people agree. Ken