From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: debugging guile runtime Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 23:10:50 +0200 Message-ID: <8739gh70dh.fsf@pobox.com> References: <20110829125030.GB30079@ccellier.rd.securactive.lan> <20110829162400.GB21699@ccellier.rd.securactive.lan> <87y5ycowh3.fsf@ambire.localdomain> <20110830105642.GA16079@ccellier.rd.securactive.lan> <87wrduhp1x.fsf@gnu.org> <20110830162527.GA20481@ccellier.rd.securactive.lan> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1314825064 31596 80.91.229.12 (31 Aug 2011 21:11:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 21:11:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org To: rixed@happyleptic.org Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 31 23:11:00 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@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 1Qys3n-0005Ab-Uh for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 23:11:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51745 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qys3n-0004M8-EC for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:10:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:52167) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qys3k-0004Lm-L7 for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:10:57 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qys3j-00083x-Cr for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:10:56 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([74.115.168.62]:39395 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qys3i-00083j-UL for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:10:55 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C585F737F; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:10:54 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=0aZxfDny6Ns/efVC5MjdG+H38tg=; b=K6kZ4x Utb43P/74iEhlhR/E1/qlct/HmjNKJAur9CY39ExtSDxoMuJJf2a25LkbLYFpvNo sQumVSNm+EdLJIVNImI4JNsq1yutBMFCSkjzZ5DA6DGmReTwbW0Zukmqk8M+iFrq PJigvBn1UG8r15a2HAeqH1OR0084gzTEfjfBY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=GwZoi7TVxe6qKm1TgiAyqYyao1/BJ1FA gSn2PC29jIsUUuFdn2sD+VZbWs49fbgGfmiNQ+nTFQejj90wA8ipKBtrPewbLvdX 5BlEArYyyIIeiQ2tCIm6Wd4/Yr++849tZrCmFVutx8vWvuVlgVqA99gdZV6mKabV UXKFhXY7/Tw= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD73A737E; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:10:54 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from badger (unknown [90.164.198.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 38A09737D; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:10:54 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20110830162527.GA20481@ccellier.rd.securactive.lan> (rixed@happyleptic.org's message of "Tue, 30 Aug 2011 18:25:27 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: B69569F6-D415-11E0-BC19-65B1DE995924-02397024!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 74.115.168.62 X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:8757 Archived-At: Are you saying that we should have an interface that makes sure that the child process *only* has some set of file descriptors open? Just trying to understand :) Andy -- http://wingolog.org/