From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?"=C5=A0t=C4=9Bp=C3=A1n_?= =?UTF-8?Q?N=C4=9Bmec"?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#6535: 24.0.50; grep seems not to work Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 20:27:18 +0200 Message-ID: <87r5jp66ex.fsf@gmail.com> References: <6813-Mon28Jun2010175948+0100-jpff@codemist.co.uk> <87eifqtf38.fsf@gmail.com> <4C29C027.3010700@swipnet.se> <876312t7iz.fsf@gmail.com> <4C2A16C7.2020709@swipnet.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1277838753 6362 80.91.229.12 (29 Jun 2010 19:12:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 19:12:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 6535@debbugs.gnu.org To: Jan =?UTF-8?Q?Dj=C3=A4rv?= Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 29 21:12:32 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OTgER-0000XI-4g for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:12:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52093 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OTgEP-0002Uh-SI for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:12:29 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=48496 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OTg1s-0007yE-J1 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:59:35 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OTg1j-0002sn-V4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:59:25 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:54437) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OTg1j-0002sj-TQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:59:23 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OTff7-000793-UD; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:36:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: =?UTF-8?Q?"=C5=A0t=C4=9Bp=C3=A1n_?= =?UTF-8?Q?N=C4=9Bmec"?= Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:36:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 6535 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 6535-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B6535.127783652827457 (code B ref 6535); Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:36:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 6535) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jun 2010 18:35:28 +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 1OTfeZ-00078o-Dy for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:35:28 -0400 Original-Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.157]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OTfXd-000759-Dm for 6535@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:28:18 -0400 Original-Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so636327fgb.15 for <6535@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 11:28:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:cc:subject :in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=K2xpKrsDvtQeRKdtklMLibYWFu9ghPCpA6MVgkSpZUU=; b=sj7GPbGDhPbj3EsNrB2NAhSUMqlsVr8SR1hgFDU7Yb2zdk2epvD4Y3IRsOYOB7uxEz qYkwDHtGeoOMo9CtOKVsbKvybvzPMchs0hkevW53c7GpXv5HzJgrvbn7ZoLRtGzwfJAZ 8U7e89QtV6yDjb5kmqu7g2BmmQLj/0kkZV9ug= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date :message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=swZSuXgEVnTjFPbLX7fBYC8KDeDNLWTqImgd0N2mWhbmqYmGKiVcYeZQGYMX6IBlvd x6AxYNwIBBmFOZ0uvNa3xIzq45K7b97cKxmZh8jXmJCrG8oGx78Enuq/zX4HL6IH3Gmp WUaaTRhOfR8OkE8WhvgqFsjvLoOS0GHEVGLCY= Original-Received: by 10.87.35.20 with SMTP id n20mr10440329fgj.0.1277836084921; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 11:28:04 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from localhost ([88.103.132.186]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k29sm7466121fkk.15.2010.06.29.11.28.02 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 29 Jun 2010 11:28:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C2A16C7.2020709@swipnet.se> ("Jan =?UTF-8?Q?Dj=C3=A4rv"'s?= message of "Tue, 29 Jun 2010 17:52:39 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:35:25 -0400 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:36:01 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:12:24 -0400 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: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:38118 Archived-At: Jan Dj=C3=A4rv writes: > =C5=A0t=C4=9Bp=C3=A1n N=C4=9Bmec skrev 2010-06-29 13.14: >> >> Nothing suggests anyone is working on fixing the problem. If you have a >> fix, why don't you commit it? > > I don't have a recepie for repeating the problem turning off ICANON would > solve. It isn't a high priority for me. I wonder what makes you assume somebody is working on it then. >> If you don't have a fix *now*, why is the >> breakage not reverted for the time being? I didn't even get any reaction >> on this question. > > That you must ask the person who made that checkin. ...which I did. I posted the URL in this thread already. >> >> I don't expect the trunk to be perfectly usable all the time, but I fail >> to see any value in leaving a known and repeatedly reported breakage in >> for an extended period of time. >> > > The breakage must have fixed some other problem. If breakage one is bett= er > than breakage two is a matter of opinion, depending which one you see the > most. AFAIK, I haven't seen either. I can't make much sense of Stefan's commit message. It also doesn't mention any related bug it would be supposed to fix. > > Jan D.