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#13079: 24.3.50; Emacs cannot create subprocess Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 05:54:28 +0200 Message-ID: <83obi7q1hn.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83ehj5r2gs.fsf@gnu.org> <83wqwwpfu1.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1354766096 12918 80.91.229.3 (6 Dec 2012 03:54:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 03:54:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 13079@debbugs.gnu.org To: Li Zhai Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 06 04:55:09 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 1TgSYG-0008Ca-N7 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2012 04:55:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53134 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TgSY4-0003c5-Kd for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:54:56 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:37177) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TgSY1-0003bp-5R for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:54:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TgSXz-00063R-LB for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:54:53 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:45377) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TgSXz-00063M-Ho for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:54:51 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TgSY9-0007IM-TB for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:55:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 03:55:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 13079 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 13079-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B13079.135476607928007 (code B ref 13079); Thu, 06 Dec 2012 03:55:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 13079) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Dec 2012 03:54:39 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55628 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TgSXn-0007Hg-I1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:54:39 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:36636) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TgSXl-0007HU-Qt for 13079@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:54:38 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MEL00E00C21DI00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for 13079@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2012 05:54:25 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MEL00EAWC6P5WB0@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Thu, 06 Dec 2012 05:54:25 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.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:68008 Archived-At: > Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 09:58:19 +0800 > From: Li Zhai > Cc: 13079@debbugs.gnu.org > > I got it. The maximize number of calling mktemp is 42 if we don't > remove the temporary em* files. Yes. > I found a very interesting discuss about the limit of mktemp on windows. > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47439 > > They implement a new mktemp function to walk around the limit on the > number of concurrently open files. > > Can we implement our mktemp functions instead of using microsoft's stuff? But that will just push the limit farther. It will not fix the underlying fundamental problem of not deleting temporary files in this case. Since Emacs is typically run for long periods of time, sooner or later the problem will strike anyway.