From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#30182: Update Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2018 10:04:35 +0100 Message-ID: <5A757B23.60607@gmx.at> References: <87k1wdqc4q.fsf@gmail.com> <87efmj27d5.fsf@gmail.com> <83vafvqjbf.fsf@gnu.org> <87inbvxdz8.fsf@gmail.com> <5A65AB97.1030401@gmx.at> <87po62kk10.fsf@gmail.com> <831sih23rh.fsf@gnu.org> <5A663490.3050409@gmx.at> <87r2qh5lya.fsf@gmail.com> <5A6C37A7.2020309@gmx.at> <87r2qag5wp.fsf@gmail.com> <5A6D8947.5010207@gmx.at> <87d11t9ria.fsf@gmail.com> <5A6EF1A2.30904@gmx.at> <83lgggirzp.fsf@gnu.org> <5A702D36.6040302@gmx.at> <83po5rh3pu.fsf@gnu.org> <5A718CFA.2080408@gmx.at> <878tcdtpbk.fsf@gmail.com> <5A72DD44.3060104@gmx.at> <83lggceh9m.fsf@gnu.org> <87372jh41f.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1517648650 5019 195.159.176.226 (3 Feb 2018 09:04:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2018 09:04:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: m.sujith@gmail.com, 30182@debbugs.gnu.org To: Noam Postavsky , Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 03 10:04:05 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ehtjj-0000DV-Dc for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Feb 2018 10:03:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60051 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ehtlk-0000wH-FX for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Feb 2018 04:05:56 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34673) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ehtkt-0008Fk-SK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Feb 2018 04:05:04 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ehtks-0005rh-Kt for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Feb 2018 04:05:03 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:47016) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ehtks-0005rb-Hl for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Feb 2018 04:05:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ehtks-0002Cy-9v for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Feb 2018 04:05:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2018 09:05:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 30182 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 30182-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B30182.15176486958453 (code B ref 30182); Sat, 03 Feb 2018 09:05:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 30182) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Feb 2018 09:04:55 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54909 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ehtkl-0002CH-FT for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 03 Feb 2018 04:04:55 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:53219) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ehtkj-0002C4-LD for 30182@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 03 Feb 2018 04:04:54 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([213.162.73.116]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lkjuq-1fG8dV2hKG-00aTqV; Sat, 03 Feb 2018 10:04:37 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87372jh41f.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:dmVtLmsCFFp0Ek+5lgLv7CatF959uTMwl5MfWzWRkbysjNwiWWP 4rz3vRBg6Db4LUxUw7l0t5z3JLszwKBj7rA9AkT0e73PLIZ1OUNHHV9BZAwvywdYlQPdjk/ 49Thn1fc/RG74Spva5+SMqyAuK8x7crsHJOegV3x7eJjYX6cEoJDj8d68o6FwgA/AjUQJOQ 0aW/Zz1188hpZP3vI+cQQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:9GL1DiAfGlE=:uHmGK2iaDyqbfHgTPcuPUr HewiI9gVTiZ8TWELIIpTUck+JSHmU5o7V/8heXDGx4efOBxvNFgyCzgfRyK4wYz9BZlIqs1Dz FdpzSPkASW+mDPtwcJ/gOvbovAQEM1xN61Tk9qZsL73l3Lpbq510CVhAMxfZBw/FTraOfK1hF zrXWc6e85+jVSw1HwFJwkqpizh4byVsgoBks1sDth0e9wZYqf57qcDerHcfELQfZ79bcb26r0 A5EWLTQBqkaKhsjwmCizEz5QD/Ew9ufnkcD1UAfJJX+2gf6stNkbBdYJuXg7yBctolaUD5E/c DBFgz7/ctYGkTeK1QN3nxax5/IpyoBoVA8iGL1Qg2sofBT4VNDOsofzQsL28Eky36K/7/E7sY q+ar+B07Dm+jd+AaclT3SgusRPr4d4AF4O5P77N8qeaImRG2JMKNVfAfOp+WuFHgf1FrKN1mO bzmCAf58aKB6UTgNCK1eZeG56QdeadY4DwNqtW0IkfLTLF7YV35t95mSI4BpgrVIcCi/r2O9X utpKnXwTQUU8vTA1MMY1K7YsZ0+W9V1GpybzQFMdc6HEMgeSPps1gENoZg9PzCoaab+IUQlGc IrAKZT7SmLtvt8l22v4ZcrLji7jlzEO0/Xz/ix0puIBQYydEM5L2EBl9rXUFQIpVQZWQpx5kh UKmNWSGaxwaBuiGzBDce6YuGhGk4uKY79YcxdmiusYiEP5MhoYeJh4wjSnbsT0VJP6sVaBvu/ r7U3QIXmb6sbFzu5L3pZIl2dhQB3v3KhZBjThLunlOJppiGTLyiNceRwG9L/SdNYmoO7KiIo X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:142839 Archived-At: > This is reproducible from > > emacs -Q -L .../w3m -l w3m -f w3m > > where .../w3m is a checkout of https://github.com/ecbrown/emacs-w3m. Thanks for the work. > #75 0x000000000059a88c in handle_async_input () at ../../src/keyboard.c:7129 > #76 0x000000000059a8ab in process_pending_signals () at ../../src/keyboard.c:7143 > #77 0x0000000000644d8f in maybe_quit () at ../../src/eval.c:1545 So at least this part of my earlier conjecture > which, if count is zero, calls maybe_quit which according to > > if (!NILP (Vquit_flag) && NILP (Vinhibit_quit)) > process_quit_flag (); > else if (pending_signals) > process_pending_signals (); > > may call process_pending_signals wasn't entirely misguided and if I had understood the implications of process_pending_signals, I probably would have been able to identify the problem too. So my hint was at the atimer part. Bad luck. In either case, an average Lisp programmer will be completely lost when trying to understand process_pending_signals and gobble_input and their possible implications. But maybe it is undocumentable. martin