From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#71477: 30.0.50; Lock files are not deleted on Windows 98 Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:03:01 +0300 Message-ID: <861q537htm.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87r0d4bzut.fsf.ref@yahoo.com> <87r0d4bzut.fsf@yahoo.com> <867cew8zgh.fsf@gnu.org> <87ikygb6hp.fsf@yahoo.com> <86h6e06kn5.fsf@gnu.org> <87bk47c4cd.fsf@yahoo.com> <86bk477vzx.fsf@gnu.org> <871q53c2ur.fsf@yahoo.com> <868qzb7uic.fsf@gnu.org> <87jzivamzp.fsf@yahoo.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="2467"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 71477@debbugs.gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 11 22:25:46 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sH83t-0000L7-Qv for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 22:25:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sH83Q-0007gs-SD; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:25:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sH83H-0007do-1h for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:25:07 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sH83G-0003Tg-I2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:25:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sH83E-0002n2-LH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:25:04 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 20:25:04 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 71477 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 71477-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B71477.171813745410537 (code B ref 71477); Tue, 11 Jun 2024 20:25:04 +0000 Original-Received: (at 71477) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Jun 2024 20:24:14 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36375 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sH82P-0002js-Mw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:24:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:47376) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sH82J-0002i3-UO for 71477@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:24:08 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sH1A0-0006DA-22; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 09:03:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=Psl2QWb5Kz8wi0XcdkexRjxvrchuYZ1dgEXlRDps+/Q=; b=EqcVjNwbyX+G LnqTT4+FSEtiYG8Ra6ogz7U2YZ0JB2uSUGLX36wcptOChOAFVYMkey4R0reenqOQ9G63f63uzD7Ko zLFQjJgOigSYXXUtqoZ0KqpR3lkpidm1y7W02G3LP/PKjxlsLQ7idXic2yZgqZr3QH16ICixkEjAS gEk9a7JaVXXbxT/pxHsQ12yPxThKSAwnY5Kviu+e2uRFkSVEZ2u2qzgGSUC3shPLwEul47RVu2+wo mbC4sW3tyavgtIG7GE/oLBqIYDIYmkJZ6aXQlImqzFXPMPOUY2NJpUTLMcqMNMxYiX4dK+SQuH6GX ZV+fAr0GnE/8Cj1mrz0Z/A==; In-Reply-To: <87jzivamzp.fsf@yahoo.com> (message from Po Lu on Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:43:06 +0800) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:287115 Archived-At: > From: Po Lu > Cc: 71477@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:43:06 +0800 > > > The only possible issue I see with allowing a negative PID is that the > > code checks for "pid > 0" or "pid < 0" somewhere; if that is the case, > > we should replace those with comparisons with -1 instead. > > > > Can you test the above on Windows 9X when you have a chance? Then we > > could install it. > > If it doesn't produce any adverse effect on modern Windows, and what I > raised is not important, let's install it now, and I will test it as > soon as may be, or it might fall by the wayside. OK, but could you provide some additional details, so I could understand the issue better? What kind of negative values do you get from getpid on Windows 98, and what does the system show as the PID of that process? Is the value really such a large positive number that its MSB is set? According to my records, _getpid just calls GetCurrentProcessId and returns the value as an int. So for _getpid to return a negative value, GetCurrentProcessId should return a very large positive value, I think.