Re: (interrup-process ...) broken on NT native
Adrian Aichner <aichner(a)ecf.teradyne.com> writes:
>>>>> "Gunnar" == Gunnar Evermann
<ge204(a)eng.cam.ac.uk> writes:
Gunnar> could you elaborate what "doesn't work" means? Does it
Oops, sorry. It does neither kill the shell, nor the sub-process.
A sleep process not run as a sub-process of a "cmd" shell can be
killed fine either by name or object.
Gunnar> Have you tried running this in a debugger and single
Gunnar> stepping through process_send_signal()? Alternatively you
Yes. It gave me a bit of a head-ache :-)
:-)
SIGINT under NT is implemented by sending CTRL_C_EVENT.
I got lost during debug trying to figure out what's wrong.
Gunnar> could try backing out patches until it works :-(
Sounds pretty scary without your help. Who knows what interactions
exist between your patches and Bens' and others'.
I think there should be no interactions. My changes are pretty trivial
and only consist of some extra CHECK_LIVE_PROCESS calls.
>> It would be great if we could fix this for 21.1 even, if
not for
>> 21.1.10.
Gunnar> indeed. I think I never intended my changes to go into
Gunnar> 21.1, for which I had a simpler version, but this should
Gunnar> still work.
Hmmh, can you give me some pointers to problematic portions of your
patches or point me to the simpler patch on xemacs-patches?
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