This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [64bit] emacs is unable to call subprocesses if display-time-mode is set
- From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
- Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 11:11:05 +0200
- Subject: Re: [64bit] emacs is unable to call subprocesses if display-time-mode is set
- References: <5156C44D dot 7050805 at cornell dot edu> <20130330111714 dot GA17203 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <51598232 dot 5020505 at cornell dot edu> <5159B006 dot 3060100 at cornell dot edu>
- Reply-to: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
On Apr 1 12:04, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 4/1/2013 8:48 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
> >On 3/30/2013 7:17 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>On Mar 30 06:54, Ken Brown wrote:
> >>>When you set display-time-mode in emacs, the mode line near the
> >>>bottom of the screen shows the current time. The code that does
> >>>this involves setting itimers.
> >>
> >>Can you extrace a simple testcase from the itimer code? That would help
> >>a lot to track down this case. I'm a bit scared of emacs...
> >
> >I was wrong about itimers. It turns out that emacs uses two different
> >kinds of timers. One type is defined in C code and uses itimers, and
> >the other type is defined in Lisp code. It's the latter that's involved
> >here. So it won't be easy to make a test case in plain C.
> >
> >I'm also finding that the order in which I do things affects whether or
> >not the bug shows up. For example, if I start a shell within emacs
> >before setting display-time-mode, the bug disappears. I'll keep looking
> >at the emacs code, but maybe you'll be able to see something in the
> >strace output.
>
> Sorry for yet another email, but I just wanted to let you know that
> you shouldn't put much time into this unless something jumps out at
> you.
>
> I just looked at this with gdb again and noticed that the function
> `Fcall_process' [which is the C function that implements the lisp
> function `call-process'] is being called with an argument nargs =
> 4305072226, which is 0x1009A3062; the value should be 4. nargs is
> of type ptrdiff_t. I'll try to figure out why this is happening.
Thanks, Ken! I hold myself back for the time being. Btw., your
copyright assignment has arrived.
Thanks,
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat