Adrian Aichner <aichner(a)ecf.teradyne.com&gt; writes: :-) I think there should be no interactions. My changes are pretty trivial and only consist of some extra CHECK_LIVE_PROCESS calls. http://www.xemacs.org/list-archives/xemacs-patches/199912/msg00066.html In your test cases you have to careful, when you evaluate them. I just evaluated them wrapped in a progn and thought the sleep didn't get killed (on Unix). The real problem was that we never got back to the event-loop and thus status_notify didn't get called before the second message. Put in a (sit-for 1) to be sure. Have you tried using Fdelete_process instead of Finterrupt_process? random other idea: Can you kill the subprocess from outside xemacs and see whether we at least notice that? Gunnar