[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824 |
Date: |
Sun, 04 Jul 2021 16:49:53 +0300 |
> From: Maxim Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2021 20:37:24 +0700
>
> I admit that I wrongly added ":noquery t", for some reason I believed
> that it allows to choose whether processes are allowed to exist longer
> than emacs or it is preferred to kill them with emacs. Actually
> asynchronous processes are killed always and the option manages the
> query only. This option should be dropped to restore compatibility with
> previous variant.
>
> I have not found a way to detach asynchronous process from emacs.
> Surprisingly it is possible for synchronous processes but it is
> impossible to detect failure (thus to allow a user to figure out what
> has happened)
>
> (process-file-shell-command command nil 0 nil)
>
> So process API in emacs is a kind of a short blanket.
>
> Accidentally I have created an example of program that is incompatible
> with 'pipe asynchronous processes in emacs
>
> #!/bin/sh
> exec 1>&-
> exec 2>&-
> sleep 30
>
> (let ((command "cpu-stress-test")
> (process-connection-type nil))
> (start-process-shell-command command nil command))
>
> And emacs (at least 26.3) consumes 100% CPU for the specified amount of
> time. I do not see any reason to do so since the program does not do
> anything ugly. I have not found a way to explicitly force emacs to close
> pipes. That is why I consider it as an outstanding bug. Emacs must
> properly handle closed pipes.
>
> So `process-file-shell-command' ... 0 is better than current
> `start-process-shell-command' but it does not allow to add error handling.
>
> So besides that I still have no guess what problem you suspect, now I
> know that emacs may become mad in response to purely innocent action of
> a child process.
Sorry, I'm not sure I understand what this is all about. Are you
still talking about the patch you proposed?
- bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824, Maxim Nikulin, 2021/07/01
- bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/07/01
- Message not available
- bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824, Maxim Nikulin, 2021/07/02
- bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/07/02
- Message not available
- bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824, Maxim Nikulin, 2021/07/02
- bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/07/02
- Message not available
- bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824, Maxim Nikulin, 2021/07/03
- bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/07/03
- Message not available
- bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824, Maxim Nikulin, 2021/07/04
- bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824, Maxim Nikulin, 2021/07/05
- bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/07/05
bug#12972: 24.3.50; Move `org-open-file' and associated code out of Org mode, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2021/07/30