bug#60556: 29.0.60; Fatal error accurred when editing init.el with flymake enabled on Windows 10

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Eason Huang <aqua0210@foxmail.com>
> Cc: 60556@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2023 20:11:23 +0800
> 
> (gdb) thread apply all bt
> 
> Thread 43 (Thread 14608.0x3f20):
> #0  0x00007ffda9a90bb1 in ntdll!DbgBreakPoint () from 
> C:\Windows\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll
> #1  0x00007ffda9abcc2e in ntdll!DbgUiRemoteBreakin () from 
> C:\Windows\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll
> #2  0x00007ffda8fa7614 in KERNEL32!BaseThreadInitThunk () from 
> C:\Windows\System32\kernel32.dll
> #3  0x00007ffda9a426a1 in ntdll!RtlUserThreadStart () from 
> C:\Windows\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll
> #4  0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
> Backtrace stopped: previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?)
> 
> Thread 5 (Thread 14608.0x4bf8):
> #0  0x00007ffda9a90b14 in ntdll!ZwWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory () from 
> C:\Windows\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll
> #1  0x00007ffda9a42e17 in ntdll!TpReleaseCleanupGroupMembers () from 
> C:\Windows\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll
> #2  0x00007ffda8fa7614 in KERNEL32!BaseThreadInitThunk () from 
> C:\Windows\System32\kernel32.dll
> #3  0x00007ffda9a426a1 in ntdll!RtlUserThreadStart () from 
> C:\Windows\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll
> #4  0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
> Backtrace stopped: previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?)
> 
> Thread 4 (Thread 14608.0x4e10):
> #0  0x00007ffda9a90b14 in ntdll!ZwWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory () from 
> C:\Windows\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll
> #1  0x00007ffda9a42e17 in ntdll!TpReleaseCleanupGroupMembers () from 
> C:\Windows\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll
> #2  0x00007ffda8fa7614 in KERNEL32!BaseThreadInitThunk () from 
> C:\Windows\System32\kernel32.dll
> #3  0x00007ffda9a426a1 in ntdll!RtlUserThreadStart () from 
> C:\Windows\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll
> #4  0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
> Backtrace stopped: previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?)
> 
> Thread 3 (Thread 14608.0x4338):
> #0  0x00007ffda7901104 in win32u!NtUserGetMessage () from 
> C:\Windows\System32\win32u.dll
> --Type <RET> for more, q to quit, c to continue without paging--

Did you type RET there?  Because there should be more threads (at
least 2 more)...

Thanks.