From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#8334: Segmentation fault in mark_object (in my patched version) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 02:20:40 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87ei5xs5q0.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87mxkltjdc.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1300930640 27840 80.91.229.12 (24 Mar 2011 01:37:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 01:37:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 8334@debbugs.gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 24 02:37:15 2011 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 1Q2ZUB-0005e3-1X for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 02:37:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39293 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q2ZU7-00017m-Pe for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:37:11 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=34260 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q2ZU3-00017h-4B for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:37:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2ZU1-0005xE-RH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:37:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:42307) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2ZU1-0005x4-Pi for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:37:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2ZFS-0006IK-5q; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:22:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Lennart Borgman Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 01:22:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 8334 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 8334-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B8334.130092966924090 (code B ref 8334); Thu, 24 Mar 2011 01:22:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 8334) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Mar 2011 01:21:09 +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 1Q2ZEa-0006GV-Ly for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:21:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ew0-f44.google.com ([209.85.215.44]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2ZEY-0006Fw-62 for 8334@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:21:07 -0400 Original-Received: by ewy19 with SMTP id 19so2299608ewy.3 for <8334@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:21:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=RzUlQQ9XMMYVxH4zyKwbJRJTEUpq9LfhgHqct3XaHGw=; b=DcxevprqIt3FaW5nPoO3iNKuoTrADdu5iPWJHAqHQ5Z2K0eHTCPPiurLKfPm1Pca6p fy57SC4HAHLx7Xk6OlO4apJdL5xA2ZHOqxZ2zj7y1wokJdMCzhi4QEw8UA46vADSFOL3 GGZicSeSCVqDSQ33hC/Isr5M9Yd3ba48f1JwU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=ImDHF4psp5uGaIg3pSKuH3z4N1Ivum2rV6ist0V44xTEDrNqqh1sDsNTMeIhB9esrS vWbuMSM9KOzoShtHI2UiZetdnfpadbXQ2XCHfcLMMpJBa7xraSrITOq6p4UhkuqtStK5 rz0ZYBVHGLAaGWzqumyQA3O1mjTkbvz5eqEZI= Original-Received: by 10.213.109.199 with SMTP id k7mr49960ebp.134.1300929660352; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:21:00 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.213.22.6 with HTTP; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:20:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87mxkltjdc.fsf@stupidchicken.com> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:22:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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: , 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:45300 Archived-At: On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 2:09 AM, Chong Yidong wrote: > Lennart Borgman writes: > >> Of course there is no test case for this. I have not idea what caused >> it (except from the info in the backtrace). But what is the advantage >> and meaning of tagging it as "unreproducible"? > > It is an indicator to Emacs developers that they should work on other > bugs. It seems like you do not consider it worth looking at. Is not that a quite strange handling of a crash report? How did you came to your conclusion?