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#9671: 24.0.50; Two bidi crashes Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:15:24 +0200 Message-ID: <83obxwqx03.fsf@gnu.org> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1317763004 11521 80.91.229.12 (4 Oct 2011 21:16:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 21:16:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 9671-done@debbugs.gnu.org To: David Reitter Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 04 23:16:40 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBCLv-0001IH-0f for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:16:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34764 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RBCLt-0000K2-TO for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 17:16:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:41970) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RBCLq-0000Je-A8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 17:16:35 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RBCLo-0000ma-MU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 17:16:34 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:41623) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RBCLo-0000mH-JL for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 17:16:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBCNH-0004Yz-3T for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 17:18:03 -0400 Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 21:18:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 9671 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Mail-Followup-To: 9671@debbugs.gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org Original-Received: via spool by 9671-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D9671.131776303717467 (code D ref 9671); Tue, 04 Oct 2011 21:18:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9671-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Oct 2011 21:17:17 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBCMW-0004Xg-Vo for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 17:17:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBCMF-0004Ws-4B for 9671-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 17:17:14 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LSK005008AESS00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for 9671-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:15:26 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.124.91.138]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LSK005Q98DNAD90@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:15:23 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 17:18:03 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) 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:52184 Archived-At: tags 9671 moreinfo > From: David Reitter > Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 17:01:28 -0400 > > I'm forward two crash reports I have received that may have to do with bidirectional text. I have no further information. (When interpreting the call stacks, note the optimization settings for those builds.) Thanks, but such reports are useless. The first one is impossible to debug without a reproducible test case. bidi_level_of_next_char, the function that called `abort', has no less than 5 different calls to `abort', each one for a different reason. The second crash means that one of the Lisp files was improperly loaded, which is only possible if the package was not built correctly. And the versions reported are old, made of old code base (2-month old in one case). A lot of water went under the bidi bridge since then. So I'm closing this report. If the people who reported the problems can provide the missing information, at least a test case, I will reopen and look into this. Thanks.