From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#16433: 24.3.50; find_newline screws up in Rmail buffers Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 19:36:17 +0200 Message-ID: <837ga25uum.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83r48b62ut.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1389721039 15629 80.91.229.3 (14 Jan 2014 17:37:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:37:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 16433@debbugs.gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 14 18:37:20 2014 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 1W37vS-00075d-Av for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 18:37:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49751 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W37vR-0004DJ-Kc for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:37:17 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55315) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W37vJ-0004CU-2P for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:37:14 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W37vD-0002Mm-3l for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:37:09 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:36593) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W37vD-0002Mg-0z for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:37:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1W37vC-0007UN-CJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:37:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:37:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 16433 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 16433-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B16433.138972100228737 (code B ref 16433); Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:37:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 16433) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Jan 2014 17:36:42 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50612 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1W37ur-0007TQ-Ew for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:36:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:39964) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1W37uc-0007Sr-Ss for 16433@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:36:40 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MZE00500J49KC00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for 16433@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 19:36:25 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MZE00502JKOFK60@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 19:36:25 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x 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:83482 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:06:01 -0500 > From: Richard Stallman > CC: 16433@debbugs.gnu.org > > Sorry, no, I don't have a recipe. It was reproducible for the same > message, at that time, but I don't know a way to make it fail again. To reproduce it at that time, do you happen to remember what sequence of commands was needed? > Perhaps buffer-swap-text should simply invalidate the cache. Could be, but just by looking at the code, it seems like buffer-swap-text does TRT, i.e. it swaps also the pointers to the cache. So maybe my guess was wrong, and some other factor is at work here. If and when it happens again, please try to look for editing operations that change buffer text (insert or delete characters), but do not invalidate the cache for the region where characters were inserted or deleted. There should be a single call to invalidate_region_cache for each insertion and each deletion. This includes insertion/deletion performed indirectly, like when decoding the message text when it is displayed. Thanks.