From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Is there a way to inhibit message3 from Elisp? Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:53:09 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87618psiu4.fsf@gmail.com> <87a8y1l3ho.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1429710827 5032 80.91.229.3 (22 Apr 2015 13:53:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 13:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Oleh Krehel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 22 15:53:39 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1Ykv5m-0006Pv-8j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 15:53:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35349 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ykv5g-0006bQ-Ou for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:53:24 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46496) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ykv5c-0006YJ-JL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:53:21 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ykv5Y-0005Ty-14 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:53:20 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:42308) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ykv5X-0005TV-Se for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:53:15 -0400 Original-Received: from pastel.home (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id t3MDrAGV024627; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:53:10 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id DDB8AFAA; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:53:09 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87a8y1l3ho.fsf@gmail.com> (Oleh Krehel's message of "Tue, 21 Apr 2015 20:50:59 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV5284=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9393 : core <5284> : inlines <2775> : streams <1426731> : uri <1913024> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.22 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:185779 Archived-At: >> desired in general. It's OK to emit such a message if call-process ends >> up waiting a non-negligible amount of time for the subprocess to die >> (so as to explain to the user why Emacs is not responding), but for the >> usual case where wait_for_termination returns quickly, we should not >> emit any message at all. >> Patch welcome to fix this problem. > Please check the scratch/inhibit-message3 branch. It's easier if you include the patch in your email messages. And this patch doesn't seem to address the problem you quoted. Stefan