[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whol
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process |
Date: |
Sat, 14 Apr 2012 10:25:42 +0300 |
> From: Chong Yidong <cyd@gnu.org>
> Cc: Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com>, 11102@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 13:34:27 +0800
>
> Chong Yidong <cyd@gnu.org> writes:
>
> > If on a client frame created by "emacsclient -c -n" the C-x C-c command
> > kills Emacs, that is indeed a bug. My guess would be that the `client'
> > frame parameter is not getting correctly assigned to the newly-created
> > frame on Windows, due to the extra juggling in the #ifdef WINDOWSNT code
> > segment Juanma pointed out.
>
> Took a quick look, and indeed the "set tty = 1 on Windows" hack does
> seem to be at fault.
Like I said, I see the same "bug" on GNU/Linux, when the server runs
in a TTY session (couldn't check in a GUI session). Are you talking
about GUI sessions only?
> Here's my diagnosis:
>
> if (tty || !current_frame)
> {
> display = (const char *) ttyname (0); /* Arg is ignored. */
> current_frame = 0;
> tty = 1;
> }
>
> ...
>
> /* --no-wait implies --current-frame on ttys when there are file
> arguments or expressions given. */
> if (nowait && tty && argc - optind > 0)
> current_frame = 1;
>
> When tty = 1, if there are also -n and filename arguments, emacsclient
> assumes that a current Emacs frame must be used. This assumption is not
> correct if the tty = 1 is because of the Window hack.
But is that assumption correct if tty = 1 on GNU/Linux? In a previous
mail you said:
> With the -c option, a client frame is created, so C-x C-c should delete
> the frame without killing the main Emacs session, whether or not there
> is an -n option.
This seems to imply that using "emacsclient -c -n FILE" on a Posix
host should _not_ kill emacs when "C-x C-c" is typed. And yet in my
testing, it does, with the emacs-24 branch built just now, when the
server runs in a TTY session. Are you saying that the effect of -n
depends also on whether the server runs in a TTY session? If not,
what else am I missing?
- bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, (continued)
bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Juanma Barranquero, 2012/04/13
bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Chong Yidong, 2012/04/14
- bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Chong Yidong, 2012/04/14
- bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Chong Yidong, 2012/04/14
- bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Eli Zaretskii, 2012/04/14
- bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Chong Yidong, 2012/04/14
- bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Eli Zaretskii, 2012/04/14
- bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Chong Yidong, 2012/04/14
- bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Eli Zaretskii, 2012/04/14
- bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Chong Yidong, 2012/04/15
- bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Dani Moncayo, 2012/04/20
- bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Dani Moncayo, 2012/04/20
bug#11102: 24.0.94; C-x C-c from a client frame sometimes kills the whole Emacs process, Eli Zaretskii, 2012/04/14