From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: threads and kill-buffer Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 17:55:35 +0300 Message-ID: <83ehmfciag.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87a9x55xvd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <5046D668.4010105@yandex.ru> <50471EEB.9030405@gmx.at> <837gs8e8n7.fsf@gnu.org> <50484E88.4080804@gmx.at> <83lignd1o8.fsf@gnu.org> <5048B623.9050802@gmx.at> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1346943366 25866 80.91.229.3 (6 Sep 2012 14:56:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 14:56:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tromey@redhat.com, dmantipov@yandex.ru, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 06 16:56:08 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1T9dUw-0006as-UC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:56:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60442 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9dUu-0000pC-0T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 10:56:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51059) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9dUq-0000os-OL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 10:55:57 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9dUk-0005HM-Gb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 10:55:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:62456) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9dUk-0005HD-8k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 10:55:50 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M9X00A00O33NH00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 17:55:21 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M9X00A9MO48E740@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 17:55:21 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <5048B623.9050802@gmx.at> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.172 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:153113 Archived-At: > Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:41:39 +0200 > From: martin rudalics > CC: tromey@redhat.com, dmantipov@yandex.ru, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > Suppose *Backtrace* is current in thread A and gets killed by thread B. Why does it get killed? > Before making another buffer current for A, a debugger buffer must be > revived for B. Why is there a need to make "another buffer current for A"?. And why "a debugger buffer must be revived for B"? The "must" part is particularly confusing. > Would that be a different buffer from the *Backtrace* seen in A? Yes.