segfault 21.5.b27
17 years, 9 months
Neal Becker
21.5.b27, on fedora fc6 x86_64 built with xft.
Works OK normally, but when I tried to fire it up through an nx terminal server:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread 46912496323568 (LWP 19991)]
0x0000000000598817 in x_wm_set_cell_size ()
(gdb) where
#0 0x0000000000598817 in x_wm_set_cell_size ()
#1 0x00000000004ba980 in update_frame_face_values ()
#2 0x00000000005995d6 in x_frame_window_state ()
#3 0x00000000004dc7a8 in Fmake_frame ()
#4 0x000000000048e3d8 in Ffuncall ()
#5 0x000000000045fada in execute_optimized_program ()
#6 0x000000000048e127 in Ffuncall ()
#7 0x000000000045fada in execute_optimized_program ()
#8 0x000000000048d4ce in Feval ()
#9 0x0000000000490748 in condition_case_1 ()
#10 0x000000000045f1ba in execute_rare_opcode ()
#11 0x00000000004603ff in execute_optimized_program ()
#12 0x000000000048d4ce in Feval ()
#13 0x0000000000490748 in condition_case_1 ()
#14 0x000000000046a970 in initial_command_loop ()
#15 0x000000000048ca20 in internal_catch ()
#16 0x000000000046a8b3 in initial_command_loop ()
#17 0x0000000000488533 in xemacs_21_5_b27_x86_64_redhat_linux ()
#18 0x0000000000489120 in main ()
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Changes in font locking
17 years, 9 months
Stephen J. Turnbull
Reply-To set to xemacs-beta; no need to bother auctex-devel further
with XEmacs internal details.
Ralf Angeli writes:
> revision 1.29
> date: 2003/03/02 09:38:40; author: ben; state: Exp; lines: +440 -202
>
> [...] subr.el, view-less.el, wid-edit.el: Lots of syncing with FSF 21.2.
> With that change the whole macro was copied into subr.el
Thank you very much! And I see in an earlier post you've already
identified the place where current Emacs diverged, which was done by
Stefan Monnier. I'm convinced; we don't need to understand the
underlying implementation (I thought we did need to understand
copy-syntax-table, at least, but in the first place that call was
evidently just a thinko that we sync'ed to), only to test that
(let ((copy (copy-syntax-table (syntax-table))))
(or
(with-syntax-table (obviously-different-from-current-syntax-table)
(test-syntax-table-equal copy (syntax-table)))
(not (test-syntax-table-equal copy (syntax-table)))))
evaluates to nil, as we expect. (N.B. XEmacs's implementation of
syntax tables is sparse, so #'equal need not give the right results.
In particular, (make-syntax-table) and (standard-syntax-table) return
objects that are equivalent as syntax tables but not #'equal.)
(Thinking out loud ....) Regression tests for the bug and that
with-syntax-table works as expected should be added. Also review uses
in core (probably none) and the packages (probably few or none outside
of Gnus and AUCTeX). The use case review can be done "off-line". Is
this relevant to 21.4?
Robert, do you agree with the above analysis based on what you've seen
so far? Would you be willing to help with some part of the code
review and/or test-writing?
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: Changes in font locking
17 years, 9 months
Ralf Angeli
* David Kastrup (2007-03-13) writes:
> Ralf Angeli <angeli(a)caeruleus.net> writes:
>
>> * David Kastrup (2007-03-13) writes:
>>
>>> Finding out _who_ put that strange copy-syntax-table there for _what_
>>> reason should be easy for an XEmacs developer with CVS access.
>>
>> Could have been copied from Emacs 21.
>
> I doubt it.
Well, the call to `copy-syntax-table' is in the sources of Emacs 21.
> Can't check the Emacs CVS, however, since Savannah is
> down.
What do you need CVS for? `grep-find' did it for me.
2003-02-20 Stefan Monnier <monnier(a)cs.yale.edu>
* subr.el (with-syntax-table): Don't copy the table any more.
--
Ralf
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Problem with Super key
17 years, 9 months
Josip Gracin
Hello!
I have my Win key mapped to act as Super key and this works in GNU
Emacs, but in XEmacs it is ignored. Pressing, for example, Win-x runs
self-insert-command for 'x'. Obviously, Super key is not detected.
This happens in XEmacs 21.5.27 as well as in 21.4.19 which comes with
Ubuntu 6.10.
% xmodmap -pm
xmodmap: up to 3 keys per modifier, (keycodes in parentheses):
shift Shift_L (0x32), Shift_R (0x3e)
lock
control Control_L (0x25), Control_L (0x42), Control_R (0x6d)
mod1 Alt_L (0x40), Alt_L (0x7d), Meta_L (0x9c)
mod2 Num_Lock (0x4d)
mod3
mod4 Super_L (0x7f), Hyper_L (0x80)
mod5 Mode_switch (0x5d), ISO_Level3_Shift (0x71),
ISO_Level3_Shift (0x7c)
Any ideas how to make this work?
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Changes in font locking
17 years, 9 months
Robert Pluim
On 3/14/07, Stephen J. Turnbull <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
>
> Reply-To set to xemacs-beta; no need to bother auctex-devel further
> with XEmacs internal details.
OK. I left Ralf in the CC.
Ralf Angeli writes:
>
> > revision 1.29
> > date: 2003/03/02 09:38:40; author: ben; state: Exp; lines: +440 -202
> >
> > [...] subr.el, view-less.el, wid-edit.el: Lots of syncing with FSF 21.2.
>
> > With that change the whole macro was copied into subr.el
>
> Thank you very much! And I see in an earlier post you've already
> identified the place where current Emacs diverged, which was done by
> Stefan Monnier. I'm convinced; we don't need to understand the
> underlying implementation (I thought we did need to understand
> copy-syntax-table, at least, but in the first place that call was
> evidently just a thinko that we sync'ed to), only to test that
>
> (let ((copy (copy-syntax-table (syntax-table))))
> (or
> (with-syntax-table (obviously-different-from-current-syntax-table)
> (test-syntax-table-equal copy (syntax-table)))
> (not (test-syntax-table-equal copy (syntax-table)))))
>
> evaluates to nil, as we expect. (N.B. XEmacs's implementation of
> syntax tables is sparse, so #'equal need not give the right results.
> In particular, (make-syntax-table) and (standard-syntax-table) return
> objects that are equivalent as syntax tables but not #'equal.)
>
> (Thinking out loud ....) Regression tests for the bug and that
> with-syntax-table works as expected should be added. Also review uses
> in core (probably none) and the packages (probably few or none outside
> of Gnus and AUCTeX). The use case review can be done "off-line". Is
> this relevant to 21.4?
There are 3 uses in 21.5 core that I can see, all in help.el, and none of
them modify the syntax table. I'll check packages later.
Robert, do you agree with the above analysis based on what you've seen
> so far? Would you be willing to help with some part of the code
> review and/or test-writing?
>
>
Seems accurate.
I'll do the checking, and come up with some test cases. Not until later
today or tomorrow though, I have Real Work to do first ;-)
Regards
Robert
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: Changes in font locking
17 years, 9 months
Stephen J. Turnbull
David Kastrup writes:
> complain to you instead of to us, you accuse me of "inciting to riot"
> and declare that you can ignore reports regardless of their number.
s/reports/duplicate nagging/
> I asked Artemio to report his problem, possibly including a screen
> shot for illustration. You consider bug reports abuse, before you
> even see them?
Of course not. I do consider the way you submit reports to be
abusive, though. For heaven's sake, David, you yourself feel
compelled to wrap them in a <rant> element half the time!
As for sight unseen, if Ralf is correct, I've seen it, and if it's the
one I'm thinking of, I was unwilling to make a call then, apparently
nobody else was either, and I don't have time to do a better job now.
Unless, of course, somebody is willing to match the effort it will
cost me. Then we can check each other, which is more effective than
trying to check myself, not to mention more fun.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Not sure how to report this...
17 years, 9 months
bonasso
I'm an engineer at NASA JSC. Our (very interim) sysadmin just moved us
to Fedora Core 6 and used YUM to install xemacs 21.5.
But it's so buggy it's not useable. The most telling thing is that
there is no dired command!
My question is: do we have all the modules we need?
Thanks,
Pete Bonasso
arwen 15 $ uname -a
Linux arwen.jsc.nasa.gov 2.6.19-1.2911.6.4.fc6 #1 SMP Sat Feb 24
14:39:04 EST 2007 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
arwen 16 $ rpm -qa | grep xemacs
xemacs-packages-base-20060510-3.fc6
xemacs-21.5.27-8.fc6
xemacs-info-21.5.27-8.fc6
xemacs-devel-21.5.27-8.fc6
xemacs-common-21.5.27-8.fc6
arwen 17 $
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: Changes in font locking
17 years, 9 months
Robert Pluim
On 3/13/07, David Kastrup <dak(a)gnu.org> wrote:
>
> "Robert Pluim" <rpluim(a)gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Patch to paper over this problem follows. I suspect that
> 'copy-syntax-table'
> > is actually at fault, but with this at least the test in
> http://mid.gmane.org/
> > cp7323$qm7$1%40sea.gmane.org works.
> >
>
> The idea of the copy probably was to have things like
> `modify-syntax-entry' in `body' not have a lasting effect. I doubt
> that this is actually the intent of the macro according to its doc
> string: actually, it is quite likely that people would set up a syntax
> table with
>
> (with-syntax-table some-table
> (modify-syntax-entry ?x ?y)
> ...
> )
I agree that people would use it like that, although the test case doesn't
seem to be modifying the syntax-table that I can see.
The corresponding macro in Emacs, if I am not mistaken, is the
> following:
>
> (defmacro with-syntax-table (table &rest body)
> "Evaluate BODY with syntax table of current buffer set to TABLE.
> The syntax table of the current buffer is saved, BODY is evaluated, and
> the
> saved table is restored, even in case of an abnormal exit.
> Value is what BODY returns."
> (declare (debug t))
> (let ((old-table (make-symbol "table"))
> (old-buffer (make-symbol "buffer")))
> `(let ((,old-table (syntax-table))
> (,old-buffer (current-buffer)))
> (unwind-protect
> (progn
> (set-syntax-table ,table)
> ,＠body)
> (save-current-buffer
> (set-buffer ,old-buffer)
> (set-syntax-table ,old-table))))))
This is identical to the 21.5 version, modulo the 'copy-syntax-table'.
I think it likely that copying the syntax table is a mistake, given
> what people would expect from the doc string of the macro and given
> that there is a non-trivial amount of code around which relies on the
> non-copying behavior.
Perhaps, although I don't see how the copy-syntax-table could cause a
problem when not modifying the syntax-table, unless it was not copying
correctly.
So I don't think your patch is "papering over the problem", but rather
> fixing it. I think it likely that `copy-syntax-table' works as
> intended, and that it is just misused here.
Well, to answer that properly I need to understand the xemacs implementation
of syntax-tables, and I don't yet ;-)
Robert
--
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
mercurial.el under recent xemacs
17 years, 9 months
Sean Dague
I've got xemacs built from cvs (latest unstable, just rebuilt as of an hour
ago). Over the past few months the mercurial.el mode that I was using
stopped loading. I'm currently getting the following error when I try to
load the mode:
Structure formation error: Invalid prefix keys in sequence, ?\^C, "^Ch"
Doing the obvious thing and changing the \C-ch binding to something else
returns the exact same error, which puzzles me a lot.
The mode can be found at
http://www.selenic.com/hg/raw-file/c0271aba6abe/contrib/mercurial.el
Any pointers to what might have changed to make this fail would be highly
appreciated. I'd like to get this working again, and am happy to test out
random patches to do so.
Thanks in advance,
-Sean
--
__________________________________________________________________
Sean Dague Mid-Hudson Valley
sean at dague dot net Linux Users Group
http://dague.net http://mhvlug.org
There is no silver bullet. Plus, werewolves make better neighbors
than zombies, and they tend to keep the vampire population down.
__________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta