[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#12829: 24.3.50; emacs_abort () called from w32proc.c:1128
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#12829: 24.3.50; emacs_abort () called from w32proc.c:1128 |
Date: |
Sat, 17 Nov 2012 17:40:51 +0200 |
> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 07:35:54 -0800
> From: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
> CC: Stephen Powell <stephen_powell@optusnet.com.au>,
> 12829@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> On 11/16/2012 11:09 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Any news? Should I commit the changes?
>
> I don't see anything about it that would break things,
> though I'm looking only at the non-Windows part.
Thanks, I will install in a short while.
> The following change to wait_for_termination_1
> would be simpler, assuming the Windows waitpid emulation
> is good enough now.
>
> === modified file 'src/sysdep.c'
> --- src/sysdep.c 2012-11-14 04:55:41 +0000
> +++ src/sysdep.c 2012-11-17 15:33:25 +0000
> @@ -289,10 +289,6 @@ wait_for_termination_1 (pid_t pid, int i
> {
> while (1)
> {
> -#ifdef WINDOWSNT
> - wait (0);
> - break;
> -#else /* not WINDOWSNT */
> int status;
> int wait_result = waitpid (pid, &status, 0);
> if (wait_result < 0)
> @@ -306,7 +302,6 @@ wait_for_termination_1 (pid_t pid, int i
> break;
> }
>
> -#endif /* not WINDOWSNT */
> if (interruptible)
> QUIT;
> }
Yes, I plan to do that, given the discussion about the "interruptible"
wait here. The Windows emulation actually calls QUIT internally,
instead of returning with EINTR, but I don't think that matters in
this case.
- bug#12829: 24.3.50; emacs_abort () called from w32proc.c:1128, (continued)
bug#12829: 24.3.50; emacs_abort () called from w32proc.c:1128, Stephen Powell, 2012/11/10
bug#12829: 24.3.50; emacs_abort () called from w32proc.c:1128, Stephen Powell, 2012/11/10
bug#12829: 24.3.50; emacs_abort () called from w32proc.c:1128, Stephen Powell, 2012/11/17