Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.Received: (at 39687) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jul 2021 12:06:07 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jul 22 08:06:07 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39540 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1m6XSo-0000Ut-MK for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 08:06:06 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:54050) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <larsi@HIDDEN>) id 1m6XSi-0000UI-Ta for 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 08:06:04 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=hQnHSFAras/qgbF2C3ybznzp+l3Zeweul74xHHpuDpM=; b=aQLD2451peV6n1TeanFgwss0Ix vHNpWNPFD4f0zpsSc9O7tRxjFM9QAdgkdQHebNzHwO5xFi67kcNlLiuDs2CschUMzbS0RMwPefKuN Oxrkh/xfNWMNmK5BDwuOrvvqL8LPqPim3a2GnyClH1RadsP7/HAOj6aHVU8iR0U89yjg=; Received: from cm-84.212.220.105.getinternet.no ([84.212.220.105] helo=elva) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <larsi@HIDDEN>) id 1m6XSX-0001xw-U5; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 14:05:53 +0200 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@HIDDEN> To: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#39687: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking keyboards References: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> <83mu9cjqml.fsf@HIDDEN> <32ea14fb-1ab8-186e-2534-4d3d2a56d6d8@HIDDEN> <83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN> <6a23af03-d597-6e3e-ceb4-5fb1305a496a@HIDDEN> <87bl6vpslj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87eebr3671.wl-logan@HIDDEN> <87y29zmiaa.fsf@HIDDEN> <87bl6v2so1.wl-logan@HIDDEN> Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAABGdBTUEAALGPC/xhBQAAACBj SFJNAAB6JgAAgIQAAPoAAACA6AAAdTAAAOpgAAA6mAAAF3CculE8AAAAFVBMVEUcFxYjGBYyKShe RkOWbWWyjob////YJrFYAAAAAWJLR0QGYWa4fQAAAAd0SU1FB+UHFgwFJutvfB4AAAGoSURBVDjL bZPrlcQgCIU124CaBhSmgRWngWAqWO2/lUWTzJgH5+QPXy4XFJVyAEZ9Y4ItlHJ4BgyARFHdFLH9 jwL0mO7RMlo9hZWQUkGBsSfFBpCimD0pAKzbFWb7DoUEEraOgmoZs4GZACIi9OEsON8Fo6nWjqxM YMIFWIcMLEPHC3CAGUvKC13ABCm/Ss58AdoKSCUX5jOwFgVkUdzAT26AicMIwNpXrQKIGEaAdl5r 5dIUcqg70A2IoHLNnJjCV6G1eddNkYZSk5qDzWWtfyVT4ngojFM/y9zB2gAFvQPwOs5SqQEegEKP /lUaSGcA5v2bmqJQyYn5ABqm7NZeqg3PeADnZ+4WNdf8l8ntXWmrcXl1IN6VKfrPgLi8O5AxZMr4 ORI1L+/S83IjK0X9OSuktYEsPUWKYQR5C1kGsGoEKa9i3dcVvkBeD6W1yorElh+AschrldvDApNR ww066i6McaIzgGZDEaSp/kCOUqZpKMTJbd7nFYVgvYtWXVZUyePW8mL9DWjjMYC+A1lrCsaZO1AT UgjqAXT/J2Bl1cwT2FPPYFf8A+xpbdvyXZf2AAAAJXRFWHRkYXRlOmNyZWF0ZQAyMDIxLTA3LTIy VDEyOjA1OjM4KzAwOjAwpAzqIAAAACV0RVh0ZGF0ZTptb2RpZnkAMjAyMS0wNy0yMlQxMjowNToz OCswMDowMNVRUpwAAAAASUVORK5CYII= X-Now-Playing: Hilary Woods's _Birthmarks_: "Tongues of Wild Boar" Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 14:05:49 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87bl6v2so1.wl-logan@HIDDEN> (Logan Perkins's message of "Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:44:46 -0700") Message-ID: <87im12mu3m.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > Anyway, the fix for this needs to be gated behind an option (at least > initially), as it does cause some odd interactions with the > minibuffer. Yup. Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39687 Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > Anyway, the fix for this needs to be gated behind an option (at least > initially), as it does cause some odd interactions with the > minibuffer. Yup. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 39687) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jul 2021 22:45:17 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jul 21 18:45:17 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38936 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1m6Kxp-0003Bk-H9 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 18:45:17 -0400 Received: from [63.227.187.208] (port=59302 helo=gentoo-server) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <logan@HIDDEN>) id 1m6Kxl-0003BY-2s for 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 18:45:15 -0400 Received: by gentoo-server.smtp.lp-programming.com from 127.0.0.1 with ESMTP ; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:44:46 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:44:46 -0700 Message-ID: <87bl6v2so1.wl-logan@HIDDEN> From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#39687: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking keyboards In-Reply-To: <87y29zmiaa.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> <83mu9cjqml.fsf@HIDDEN> <32ea14fb-1ab8-186e-2534-4d3d2a56d6d8@HIDDEN> <83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN> <6a23af03-d597-6e3e-ceb4-5fb1305a496a@HIDDEN> <87bl6vpslj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87eebr3671.wl-logan@HIDDEN> <87y29zmiaa.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/27 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Score: 1.3 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:08:45 -0700, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > > Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > > Hopefully, with that sorted, we can discuss the issues around > > `temporarily_swi [...] Content analysis details: (1.3 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 FSL_HELO_NON_FQDN_1 No description available. -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS 0.0 HELO_NO_DOMAIN Relay reports its domain incorrectly X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39687 Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:08:45 -0700, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > > Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > > Hopefully, with that sorted, we can discuss the issues around > > `temporarily_switch_to_single_kboard`. > > Yes. This is basically the same issue as in bug#9729, so I'll merge the > two. And I think it'd be great to have this fixed. Yes, it is the same as bug#9729, or at least the same underlying cause/problem. I missed that bug when I went looking to see if this was already supported, as that only mentions it being a problem in context of opening files. The underlying problem applies anytime the minibuffer is in use. Still, makes sense to merge them. I just read that bug report end-to-end. I *think* for part of its discussion they were running into the fix from bug#5095. While it is true that emacs (being single threaded) only reads from one virtual keyboard at a time, it is capable of switching between virtual keyboards and interleaving their input. Nor is it the case that only one minibuffer input is possible at a time. This is fundamentally how `enable-recursive-minibuffers` works, and each client has its own minibuffer even when that is `nil`. Anyway, the fix for this needs to be gated behind an option (at least initially), as it does cause some odd interactions with the minibuffer. (For example, when two clients both open a minibuffer, when the first client finishes with the minibuffer, the prompt vanishes on the second client, and the focus switches away, but the minibuffer remains open). I think these problems can be worked through, but until they are, we need people to opt-in to them. It's also worth noting that, without recursive minibuffers, the vanishing minibuffer issue doesn't occur, but one client gets a minibuffer in use message instead. > > > I still have the assignment document and can submit > > it again if that would help. > > That'd be good; or ask copyright-clerk@HIDDEN what the status is. > I sent a message to that email an hour (ish) ago.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.Received: (at 39687) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jul 2021 22:08:59 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jul 21 18:08:59 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38889 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1m6KOh-0006MK-Hm for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 18:08:59 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:47710) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <larsi@HIDDEN>) id 1m6KOf-0006M4-9o for 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 18:08:58 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=KYZsfXzr+CwPfIbn+LaeXBViChWhJ6ogAyEtK1C2yBQ=; b=HPte2ijd4RtKHZmp3lgMVkFqu/ /s7VvUs4C7kPCF4ldTuDZKGhntHWYuLVmMbWmFrYn2Splc0ilNt7ltO/3hLoEUxpLL9n8I1Rgw6Cf aWuE5POAeW89eNJFu52ebhocsbjzTaWSWkwHBpjOO0Wq7HLjovGNtU9H3rKw8skPQeB0=; Received: from cm-84.212.220.105.getinternet.no ([84.212.220.105] helo=elva) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <larsi@HIDDEN>) id 1m6KOT-0002I5-JO; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 00:08:48 +0200 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@HIDDEN> To: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#39687: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking keyboards References: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> <83mu9cjqml.fsf@HIDDEN> <32ea14fb-1ab8-186e-2534-4d3d2a56d6d8@HIDDEN> <83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN> <6a23af03-d597-6e3e-ceb4-5fb1305a496a@HIDDEN> <87bl6vpslj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87eebr3671.wl-logan@HIDDEN> Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAABGdBTUEAALGPC/xhBQAAACBj SFJNAAB6JgAAgIQAAPoAAACA6AAAdTAAAOpgAAA6mAAAF3CculE8AAAAG1BMVEX9/f3Qz82joJ9g XVzBvr1CPj2Cfn0aFxb////y4WnOAAAAAWJLR0QIht6VegAAAAd0SU1FB+UHFRUfBfhnwKYAAAGM SURBVDjLddPBTsMwDADQtuwD2mnaeThhZ1RjdmVZxJ1FVu5D8ANTld/HyaBN1+BDD36y47ppVWXR VuWod+U0Nl21WaZbtXvAo3rTVT2D5niu3l8eULvn5u4o8/G4fpS6p+UIbd3Vpl7t2uJ0nTUgkb9D F2cwgMwceCrquq6t6rWKefJ+hNoehTYp78iHCcBam/LIDimr0ADaIAkg9sRZRQSSNIAChTMAJf3B bqzd9yOstMwfG8kMxy57jwiGecBYCfsZ2FNIMcRHW4Dgc2hG4DCraKRzAhl4VrG6yLTpBIdIOXxf bsA9xZoJ8LJXQRbuwBHn8PoqgIN3qpflhrcR4kYGcuQQ5IgJ6hv0n+6yhNOAGtJMCyBZuA9FkC/i 56DBnK4Eh1unWYUW2B+YF2C3V+rpU923Mnbr+NybtJiwmyq02V75DAWwRhbyu+McwJoQZOfOF4HC sAAQGA7BfRWB5MqVQA7p4ZDD6hcC+7SUGdyuz8CLVn8XLtxXvP8HqgRpqvg3yc8Wr9wIi/gB4J+5 pIBYQnkAAAAldEVYdGRhdGU6Y3JlYXRlADIwMjEtMDctMjFUMjE6MzE6MDUrMDA6MDAzPrefAAAA JXRFWHRkYXRlOm1vZGlmeQAyMDIxLTA3LTIxVDIxOjMxOjA1KzAwOjAwQmMPIwAAAABJRU5ErkJg gg== X-Now-Playing: Severed Heads's _Clean_: "Subjective" Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 00:08:45 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87eebr3671.wl-logan@HIDDEN> (Logan Perkins's message of "Wed, 21 Jul 2021 10:52:34 -0700") Message-ID: <87y29zmiaa.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > I assume you only applied the patch I supplied, which improves the fix > for Bug#5095, but does not address Bug#39687. Oh, sorry; I forgot what the bug report was really about. Now reopened. :-) Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39687 Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > I assume you only applied the patch I supplied, which improves the fix > for Bug#5095, but does not address Bug#39687. Oh, sorry; I forgot what the bug report was really about. Now reopened. :-) > Hopefully, with that sorted, we can discuss the issues around > `temporarily_switch_to_single_kboard`. Yes. This is basically the same issue as in bug#9729, so I'll merge the two. And I think it'd be great to have this fixed. > I still have the assignment document and can submit > it again if that would help. That'd be good; or ask copyright-clerk@HIDDEN what the status is. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs@HIDDEN>
to internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.Received: (at 39687) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jul 2021 19:52:58 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jul 21 15:52:58 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38679 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1m6IH3-0000o7-Vz for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:52:58 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37636) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1m6IH3-0000nv-4j for 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:52:57 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:60682) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1m6IGs-0000ZH-Vk; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:52:48 -0400 Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2281 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1m6IGs-00084U-JU; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:52:46 -0400 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 22:52:41 +0300 Message-Id: <83h7gn4f7a.fsf@HIDDEN> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> To: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <87eebr3671.wl-logan@HIDDEN> (message from Logan Perkins on Wed, 21 Jul 2021 10:52:34 -0700) Subject: Re: bug#39687: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking keyboards References: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> <83mu9cjqml.fsf@HIDDEN> <32ea14fb-1ab8-186e-2534-4d3d2a56d6d8@HIDDEN> <83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN> <6a23af03-d597-6e3e-ceb4-5fb1305a496a@HIDDEN> <87bl6vpslj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87eebr3671.wl-logan@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39687 Cc: larsi@HIDDEN, 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 10:52:34 -0700 > From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> > Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, > 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org > > > This change was small enough to apply without assigning copyright to the > > FSF, but for future patches you want to submit, it might make sense to > > get the paperwork started now, so that subsequent patches can be applied > > speedily. Would you be willing to sign such paperwork? > > I submitted my assignment paperwork 18 May 2020, signed via GPG. > Mr. Topham responded (on 4 Jun 2020) that he was having difficulty > verifying the signature (possibly due to it being an EDDSA key?), and > that he would try again. I have heard nothing since, but did not > follow up as this thread was stalled, and last summer was a > bit... intense. I still have the assignment document and can submit > it again if that would help. Please just ping the FSF copyright clerk with the above information.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 39687) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jul 2021 17:53:03 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jul 21 13:53:03 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38512 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1m6GP0-00066U-Td for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 13:53:03 -0400 Received: from [63.227.187.208] (port=59300 helo=gentoo-server) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <logan@HIDDEN>) id 1m6GOv-000662-P5 for 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 13:53:01 -0400 Received: by gentoo-server.smtp.lp-programming.com from 127.0.0.1 with ESMTP ; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 10:52:36 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 10:52:34 -0700 Message-ID: <87eebr3671.wl-logan@HIDDEN> From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#39687: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking keyboards In-Reply-To: <87bl6vpslj.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> <83mu9cjqml.fsf@HIDDEN> <32ea14fb-1ab8-186e-2534-4d3d2a56d6d8@HIDDEN> <83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN> <6a23af03-d597-6e3e-ceb4-5fb1305a496a@HIDDEN> <87bl6vpslj.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/27 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Score: 1.3 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 08:57:44 -0700, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > > Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > > > I *think* I have a patch that still fixes the current behavior, and > > does not [...] Content analysis details: (1.3 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 FSL_HELO_NON_FQDN_1 No description available. -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS 0.0 HELO_NO_DOMAIN Relay reports its domain incorrectly X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39687 Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 08:57:44 -0700, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > > Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > > > I *think* I have a patch that still fixes the current behavior, and > > does not reintroduce those two bugs, I've included it below. > > Basically, the fix for Bug#5095 should only be applied if we are in > > the right context. If we're not, the if block above puts a > > Qswitch_frame at the head of the side queue and triggers > > replay_entire_sequence, so we just skip the second check. It'll get > > run again and catch the interruption on the next pass, but in the > > right context. > > I tried the various test cases, and the behaviour with your patch > clearly seems better to me, so I've applied it to Emacs 28. I assume you only applied the patch I supplied, which improves the fix for Bug#5095, but does not address Bug#39687. Hopefully, with that sorted, we can discuss the issues around `temporarily_switch_to_single_kboard`. > > But as Eli says, this is a ticklish area, so if this (re-)introduces > other bugs, we'll have to revert. Fair enough. I am fairly confident that patch won't cause problems (but it might allow latent problems to surface). This is, indeed, a tricky area: it took the better part of 2 hours last year to "wrap my head around" the issue well enough to write the patch. If any other issues arise, I'm happy to address those. > > This change was small enough to apply without assigning copyright to the > FSF, but for future patches you want to submit, it might make sense to > get the paperwork started now, so that subsequent patches can be applied > speedily. Would you be willing to sign such paperwork? I submitted my assignment paperwork 18 May 2020, signed via GPG. Mr. Topham responded (on 4 Jun 2020) that he was having difficulty verifying the signature (possibly due to it being an EDDSA key?), and that he would try again. I have heard nothing since, but did not follow up as this thread was stalled, and last summer was a bit... intense. I still have the assignment document and can submit it again if that would help. Regards, Logan
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 39687) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jul 2021 15:58:03 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jul 21 11:58:03 2021 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38404 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1m6Ebj-0000v4-6f for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 11:58:03 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:44248) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <larsi@HIDDEN>) id 1m6Ebe-0000u6-Q7 for 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 11:57:59 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=gRpLk7n4E9s12G0qSzkzSRsUr4WEdd3cXGo3WUzJhOE=; b=V97QfvvYLmln4Ex4NBPnoN9gP3 b0kdgaRMGq7utr/IAqelF0PEDrxBuaX73uFj4hsJskfrlCBK3z0OossSSNiXBiQerufuzVNI7Ou/Z on0kb0zU/kHa6lY3/txMojwfGYB5Xf9c7H9yMh4pq7id+Rkl3qmISz6k14dqMENLQHHY=; Received: from cm-84.212.220.105.getinternet.no ([84.212.220.105] helo=elva) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <larsi@HIDDEN>) id 1m6EbQ-00082t-K6; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 17:57:47 +0200 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@HIDDEN> To: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#39687: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking keyboards References: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> <83mu9cjqml.fsf@HIDDEN> <32ea14fb-1ab8-186e-2534-4d3d2a56d6d8@HIDDEN> <83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN> <6a23af03-d597-6e3e-ceb4-5fb1305a496a@HIDDEN> X-Now-Playing: Coil's _The Restitution of Decayed Intelligence_: "A List Of Wishes" Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 17:57:44 +0200 In-Reply-To: <6a23af03-d597-6e3e-ceb4-5fb1305a496a@HIDDEN> (Logan Perkins's message of "Mon, 18 May 2020 18:15:15 -0700") Message-ID: <87bl6vpslj.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > I *think* I have a patch that still fixes the current behavior, and > does not reintroduce those two bugs, I've included it below. > Basically, the fix for Bug#5095 should only be applied if we are [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39687 Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > I *think* I have a patch that still fixes the current behavior, and > does not reintroduce those two bugs, I've included it below. > Basically, the fix for Bug#5095 should only be applied if we are in > the right context. If we're not, the if block above puts a > Qswitch_frame at the head of the side queue and triggers > replay_entire_sequence, so we just skip the second check. It'll get > run again and catch the interruption on the next pass, but in the > right context. I tried the various test cases, and the behaviour with your patch clearly seems better to me, so I've applied it to Emacs 28. But as Eli says, this is a ticklish area, so if this (re-)introduces other bugs, we'll have to revert. This change was small enough to apply without assigning copyright to the FSF, but for future patches you want to submit, it might make sense to get the paperwork started now, so that subsequent patches can be applied speedily. Would you be willing to sign such paperwork? -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.Received: (at 39687) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Oct 2020 19:23:58 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 01 15:23:58 2020 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38405 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1kO4BG-00051L-0J for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2020 15:23:58 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:53268) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1kO4BA-000511-Lr for 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2020 15:23:52 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:59978) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1kO4B3-0002OM-Au; Thu, 01 Oct 2020 15:23:41 -0400 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3830 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1kO4B2-0006nA-HF; Thu, 01 Oct 2020 15:23:41 -0400 Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2020 22:23:34 +0300 Message-Id: <83a6x5hhs9.fsf@HIDDEN> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <877ds93hwx.fsf@HIDDEN> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Thu, 01 Oct 2020 20:44:30 +0200) Subject: Re: bug#39687: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking keyboards References: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> <83mu9cjqml.fsf@HIDDEN> <32ea14fb-1ab8-186e-2534-4d3d2a56d6d8@HIDDEN> <83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN> <6a23af03-d597-6e3e-ceb4-5fb1305a496a@HIDDEN> <877ds93hwx.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39687 Cc: logan@HIDDEN, 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@HIDDEN> > Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2020 20:44:30 +0200 > > Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > > > I *think* I have a patch that still fixes the current behavior, and > > does not reintroduce those two bugs, I've included it below. > > Basically, the fix for Bug#5095 should only be applied if we are in > > the right context. If we're not, the if block above puts a > > Qswitch_frame at the head of the side queue and triggers > > replay_entire_sequence, so we just skip the second check. It'll get > > run again and catch the interruption on the next pass, but in the > > right context. > > Eli, did you have a chance to take a look at the proposed patch here? I didn't feel that I understand the issue well enough, and this area is notorious for having all kinds of dark corners.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 39687) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Oct 2020 18:44:46 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 01 14:44:46 2020 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38309 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1kO3ZO-0008Bc-7T for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:44:46 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:34246) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <larsi@HIDDEN>) id 1kO3ZL-0008BO-Sc for 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:44:44 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=XmtKUATy3Et3Gi4O0EQsdLajpVkOowSvp2EeNpb3tgA=; b=OVhifEU/Q+WIpC/dHG3LLvYqSk VbDxka8G1UjuwV5GPu+Q383i9LyY//cnH0fm8PQAVQvTTzJZHgiyWy/SW3rrJqDQV9+54wHYckabk GAyCbt6o2+tbhYamLXaBGP7HclkhKfRLI6NU4rofRPlfpJuSofLgLG6+jhfQ72inxz4U=; Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=xo) by quimby with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <larsi@HIDDEN>) id 1kO3ZA-00029l-04; Thu, 01 Oct 2020 20:44:36 +0200 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@HIDDEN> To: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#39687: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking keyboards References: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> <83mu9cjqml.fsf@HIDDEN> <32ea14fb-1ab8-186e-2534-4d3d2a56d6d8@HIDDEN> <83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN> <6a23af03-d597-6e3e-ceb4-5fb1305a496a@HIDDEN> X-Now-Playing: Nanang Tatang's _Muki_: "Last Train Out" Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2020 20:44:30 +0200 In-Reply-To: <6a23af03-d597-6e3e-ceb4-5fb1305a496a@HIDDEN> (Logan Perkins's message of "Mon, 18 May 2020 18:15:15 -0700") Message-ID: <877ds93hwx.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > I *think* I have a patch that still fixes the current behavior, and > does not reintroduce those two bugs, I've included it below. > Basically, the fix for Bug#5095 should only be applied if we are [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39687 Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> writes: > I *think* I have a patch that still fixes the current behavior, and > does not reintroduce those two bugs, I've included it below. > Basically, the fix for Bug#5095 should only be applied if we are in > the right context. If we're not, the if block above puts a > Qswitch_frame at the head of the side queue and triggers > replay_entire_sequence, so we just skip the second check. It'll get > run again and catch the interruption on the next pass, but in the > right context. Eli, did you have a chance to take a look at the proposed patch here? -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.Stefan Kangas <stefan@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.
Received: (at 39687) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 May 2020 01:15:43 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon May 18 21:15:43 2020
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48658 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1jaqr8-0006un-Or
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 May 2020 21:15:43 -0400
Received: from mr15.netdorm.com ([64.182.101.205]:46642 helo=gw2.litvpn.com)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <logan@HIDDEN>) id 1jaqr4-0006uW-La
for 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 May 2020 21:15:41 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.43] (unknown [63.227.187.208])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by gw2.litvpn.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EFFDEE05BC;
Mon, 18 May 2020 21:15:46 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: bug#39687: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking
keyboards
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
References: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN>
<83mu9cjqml.fsf@HIDDEN>
<32ea14fb-1ab8-186e-2534-4d3d2a56d6d8@HIDDEN>
<83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN>
Message-ID: <6a23af03-d597-6e3e-ceb4-5fb1305a496a@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 18:15:15 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/68.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------17DD87586F2F79AE4ECEE762"
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39687
Cc: 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------17DD87586F2F79AE4ECEE762
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On 2/22/20 1:27 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Also, are you implicitly saying that several persons work
>> > simultaneously vis-à-vis the same Emacs server? Because if not, I'm
>> > not sure I understand how simultaneous need to input from different
>> > clients could even happen.
>>
>> That's exactly the use-case where it matters most. If you're familiar
>> with Ludum Dare and similar code-sprints, it's pretty common to
>> have multiple people working on the same files at the same time. Having
>> a shared editor makes it faster and easier to draw attention to exactly
>> where one person needs help. It's also great for teaching (when you
>> aren't physically in front of the same computer), or for onboarding new
>> team members. Screen (the terminal multiplexer) can be used to similar
>> effect, but the ability to simultaneously edit the *same* file is
>> specific to emacs.
> I don't understand what you expect Emacs to do in these use cases. If
> we process inputs from several clients as they arrive, we could
> produce results that are unexpected and even disastrous. For example,
> suppose we receive C-x from one client followed by C-u from another
> followed by C-s from the first one -- if we process these in the order
> they were received, the result will be none of what the two clients
> intended.
>
> Maybe you thought that our input code will process input in chunks of
> complete sequences, and thus avoid the above-mentioned disasters, but
> then (a) I think we will need a very thorough restructuring of the
> current code in keyboard.c, as it currently decides on this
> dynamically; and (b) you will still have the same problem if the user
> of one client types C-x and then pauses for some reason.
>
> So I'm afraid I don't see what kind of solution is sought for here,
> please clarify.
Alright, I finally had time to dig in to what commit broke the split input.
The commit was e3cebbb839fc94f314659bf667c6790edebf4297, from 19 October 2019.
It was to fix Bug#37782, and improve the fix for Bug#5095.
Reverting that commit resolves the issue, but obviously reintroduces Bug#37782.
I *think* I have a patch that still fixes the current behavior, and does not
reintroduce those two bugs, I've included it below. Basically, the fix for
Bug#5095 should only be applied if we are in the right context. If we're not,
the if block above puts a Qswitch_frame at the head of the side queue and
triggers replay_entire_sequence, so we just skip the second check. It'll get
run again and catch the interruption on the next pass, but in the right context.
diff --git a/src/keyboard.c b/src/keyboard.c
index f9b9399d50..90ed1d3e9a 100644
--- a/src/keyboard.c
+++ b/src/keyboard.c
@@ -9599,17 +9599,23 @@ read_key_sequence (Lisp_Object *keybuf, Lisp_Object prompt,
(interrupted_kboard,
Fcons (make_lispy_switch_frame (frame),
KVAR (interrupted_kboard, kbd_queue)));
+ mock_input = 0;
+ }
+ else
+ {
+ if (FIXNUMP (key) && XFIXNUM (key) != -2)
+ {
+ /* If interrupted while initializing terminal, we
+ need to replay the interrupting key. See
+ Bug#5095 and Bug#37782. */
+ mock_input = 1;
+ keybuf[0] = key;
+ }
+ else
+ {
+ mock_input = 0;
+ }
}
- if (FIXNUMP (key) && XFIXNUM (key) != -2)
- {
- /* If interrupted while initializing terminal, we
- need to replay the interrupting key. See
- Bug#5095 and Bug#37782. */
- mock_input = 1;
- keybuf[0] = key;
- }
- else
- mock_input = 0;
goto replay_entire_sequence;
}
}
--------------17DD87586F2F79AE4ECEE762
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>On 2/22/20 1:27 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN"> >
Also, are you implicitly saying that several persons work
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap=""> > simultaneously vis-à-vis the same Emacs server? Because if not, I'm
> not sure I understand how simultaneous need to input from different
> clients could even happen.
That's exactly the use-case where it matters most. If you're familiar
with Ludum Dare and similar code-sprints, it's pretty common to
have multiple people working on the same files at the same time. Having
a shared editor makes it faster and easier to draw attention to exactly
where one person needs help. It's also great for teaching (when you
aren't physically in front of the same computer), or for onboarding new
team members. Screen (the terminal multiplexer) can be used to similar
effect, but the ability to simultaneously edit the *same* file is
specific to emacs.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
I don't understand what you expect Emacs to do in these use cases. If
we process inputs from several clients as they arrive, we could
produce results that are unexpected and even disastrous. For example,
suppose we receive C-x from one client followed by C-u from another
followed by C-s from the first one -- if we process these in the order
they were received, the result will be none of what the two clients
intended.
Maybe you thought that our input code will process input in chunks of
complete sequences, and thus avoid the above-mentioned disasters, but
then (a) I think we will need a very thorough restructuring of the
current code in keyboard.c, as it currently decides on this
dynamically; and (b) you will still have the same problem if the user
of one client types C-x and then pauses for some reason.
So I'm afraid I don't see what kind of solution is sought for here,
please clarify.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>Alright, I finally had time to dig in to what commit broke the split input.
The commit was e3cebbb839fc94f314659bf667c6790edebf4297, from 19 October 2019.
It was to fix Bug#37782, and improve the fix for Bug#5095.
Reverting that commit resolves the issue, but obviously reintroduces Bug#37782.
I *think* I have a patch that still fixes the current behavior, and does not
reintroduce those two bugs, I've included it below. Basically, the fix for
Bug#5095 should only be applied if we are in the right context. If we're not,
the if block above puts a Qswitch_frame at the head of the side queue and
triggers replay_entire_sequence, so we just skip the second check. It'll get
run again and catch the interruption on the next pass, but in the right context.
diff --git a/src/keyboard.c b/src/keyboard.c
index f9b9399d50..90ed1d3e9a 100644
--- a/src/keyboard.c
+++ b/src/keyboard.c
@@ -9599,17 +9599,23 @@ read_key_sequence (Lisp_Object *keybuf, Lisp_Object prompt,
(interrupted_kboard,
Fcons (make_lispy_switch_frame (frame),
KVAR (interrupted_kboard, kbd_queue)));
+ mock_input = 0;
+ }
+ else
+ {
+ if (FIXNUMP (key) && XFIXNUM (key) != -2)
+ {
+ /* If interrupted while initializing terminal, we
+ need to replay the interrupting key. See
+ Bug#5095 and Bug#37782. */
+ mock_input = 1;
+ keybuf[0] = key;
+ }
+ else
+ {
+ mock_input = 0;
+ }
}
- if (FIXNUMP (key) && XFIXNUM (key) != -2)
- {
- /* If interrupted while initializing terminal, we
- need to replay the interrupting key. See
- Bug#5095 and Bug#37782. */
- mock_input = 1;
- keybuf[0] = key;
- }
- else
- mock_input = 0;
goto replay_entire_sequence;
}
}
</pre>
</body>
</html>
--------------17DD87586F2F79AE4ECEE762--
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 39687) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Feb 2020 18:48:19 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Feb 22 13:48:19 2020 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49991 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j5Zp2-0005fX-QO for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 22 Feb 2020 13:48:19 -0500 Received: from mr16.netdorm.com ([64.182.101.206]:44274 helo=gw1.litvpn.com) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <logan@HIDDEN>) id 1j5Z5S-0004O0-JY for 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 22 Feb 2020 13:01:11 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.43] (unknown [63.227.187.208]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gw1.litvpn.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C160C408C3; Sat, 22 Feb 2020 13:01:15 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: bug#39687: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking keyboards To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> References: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> <83mu9cjqml.fsf@HIDDEN> <32ea14fb-1ab8-186e-2534-4d3d2a56d6d8@HIDDEN> <83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN> From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> Message-ID: <5bc16edc-a02d-f9ef-ba68-e0d7b94628e4@HIDDEN> Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 10:00:42 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39687 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 13:48:15 -0500 Cc: 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) On 2/22/20 1:27 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > [Please keep the bug address on the CC list, so this whole discussion > is recorded by the Emacs issue tracker.] Oops! I hit reply instead of reply-all, not sure why Thunderbird doesn't make that the default, but I'll be more mindful of that in the future. > >> From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> >> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 10:37:39 -0800 >> >> On 2/21/20 12:23 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> >> From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> >> >> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 21:01:30 -0800 >> >> >> >> Is there some further reason to lock the keyboard that I haven't >> >> considered? >> > >> > Can we back up a little, and discuss the use cases where the current >> > behavior presents a limitation? Is quitting in the other clients the >> > only one, or are there more? >> >> Quitting in other clients is one, but fairly minor (C-z; kill %1 will >> get you out of it). Switching clients generally is another minor case. >> If you walk away with the minibuffer open by accident, and then try to >> use a remote client (via SSH or similar) later, it's locked (you can >> work around this by registering a SIGUSR handler to close the >> minibuffer, but that's not ideal). > > These seem to be valid use cases, so I tend to agree we should have an > easier way of breaking out of the minibuffer input in another client. > >> > Also, are you implicitly saying that several persons work >> > simultaneously vis-�-vis the same Emacs server? Because if not, I'm >> > not sure I understand how simultaneous need to input from different >> > clients could even happen. >> >> That's exactly the use-case where it matters most. If you're familiar >> with Ludum Dare and similar code-sprints, it's pretty common to >> have multiple people working on the same files at the same time. Having >> a shared editor makes it faster and easier to draw attention to exactly >> where one person needs help. It's also great for teaching (when you >> aren't physically in front of the same computer), or for onboarding new >> team members. Screen (the terminal multiplexer) can be used to similar >> effect, but the ability to simultaneously edit the *same* file is >> specific to emacs. > > I don't understand what you expect Emacs to do in these use cases. If > we process inputs from several clients as they arrive, we could > produce results that are unexpected and even disastrous. For example, > suppose we receive C-x from one client followed by C-u from another > followed by C-s from the first one -- if we process these in the order > they were received, the result will be none of what the two clients > intended. > > Maybe you thought that our input code will process input in chunks of > complete sequences, and thus avoid the above-mentioned disasters, but > then (a) I think we will need a very thorough restructuring of the > current code in keyboard.c, as it currently decides on this > dynamically; and (b) you will still have the same problem if the user > of one client types C-x and then pauses for some reason. > > So I'm afraid I don't see what kind of solution is sought for here, > please clarify. So I've just done some more testing, with emacs 26.3-r1 (the latest stable version in Gentoo), and emacs 27.0.50_pre20191223, the latest snapshot, both compiled with and without the gutted switch_to_single_kboard... (I'll see about getting the latest development version from the repo probably this evening). Looks like keyboard handling got changed sometime between the two versions. I ran the following sequence in all 4 copies. 1. ./emacs -nw #on seat0 2. M-x start-server 3. ./emacsclient -t #on seat1 4. Switch both to the scratch buffer 5. Put each seat's cursor on its own line 6. On seat0, type abcde 7. On seat1, type 12345 8. On seat0, type C-x 9. On seat1, type u 10. On seat1, type C-x 11. On seat0, type C-c Note that this sequence doesn't try to put emacs into single keyboard mode, so the gutted function has no impact on the results. In emacs-26, step 9 inserts a literal u on seat1's line, step 11 closes emacs. Before step 11, both seat and seat1 display C-x as "breadcrumbs" in the minibuffer. In emacs-27, step 9 undoes seat0's last action (removes abcde), step 11 closes seat1's emacsclient. Obviously, the behaviour in emacs-27 precludes simultanuous input. I also think it's poor behavior, even if we don't unlock the keyboard when the minibuffer is in use, since someone walking away after hitting C-x (or some other partial command) and then connecting later will get unexpected (and probably unseen) results with their first keypress. I'll see if I can figure out which changes in keyboard.c account for the changed behavior, and what the reason for them was.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 39687) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Feb 2020 09:28:18 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Feb 22 04:28:18 2020 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48559 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j5R58-0001JP-EI for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 22 Feb 2020 04:28:18 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:57272) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1j5R56-0001JA-6z for 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 22 Feb 2020 04:28:16 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:50748) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1j5R4x-0001Rq-DK; Sat, 22 Feb 2020 04:28:07 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3881 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1j5R4w-0000OU-7o; Sat, 22 Feb 2020 04:28:06 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 11:27:58 +0200 Message-Id: <83pne7hsyp.fsf@HIDDEN> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> To: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> In-reply-to: <32ea14fb-1ab8-186e-2534-4d3d2a56d6d8@HIDDEN> (message from Logan Perkins on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 10:37:39 -0800) Subject: Re: bug#39687: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking keyboards References: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> <83mu9cjqml.fsf@HIDDEN> <32ea14fb-1ab8-186e-2534-4d3d2a56d6d8@HIDDEN> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam-Score: 1.6 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: [Please keep the bug address on the CC list, so this whole discussion is recorded by the Emacs issue tracker.] > From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> > Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 10:37:39 -0800 > > On 2/21/20 12:23 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> > >> Date: We [...] Content analysis details: (1.6 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.2 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net [Blocked - see <https://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?176.228.60.248>] -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [209.51.188.92 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: lp-programming.com] 0.3 URIBL_RHS_DOB Contains an URI of a new domain (Day Old Bread) [URIs: lp-programming.com] 0.1 URIBL_SBL_A Contains URL's A record listed in the Spamhaus SBL blocklist [URIs: lp-programming.com] 0.6 URIBL_SBL Contains an URL's NS IP listed in the Spamhaus SBL blocklist [URIs: lp-programming.com] X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39687 Cc: 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: 0.6 (/) [Please keep the bug address on the CC list, so this whole discussion is recorded by the Emacs issue tracker.] > From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> > Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 10:37:39 -0800 > > On 2/21/20 12:23 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> > >> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 21:01:30 -0800 > >> > >> Is there some further reason to lock the keyboard that I haven't > >> considered? > > > > Can we back up a little, and discuss the use cases where the current > > behavior presents a limitation? Is quitting in the other clients the > > only one, or are there more? > > Quitting in other clients is one, but fairly minor (C-z; kill %1 will > get you out of it). Switching clients generally is another minor case. > If you walk away with the minibuffer open by accident, and then try to > use a remote client (via SSH or similar) later, it's locked (you can > work around this by registering a SIGUSR handler to close the > minibuffer, but that's not ideal). These seem to be valid use cases, so I tend to agree we should have an easier way of breaking out of the minibuffer input in another client. > > Also, are you implicitly saying that several persons work > > simultaneously vis-à-vis the same Emacs server? Because if not, I'm > > not sure I understand how simultaneous need to input from different > > clients could even happen. > > That's exactly the use-case where it matters most. If you're familiar > with Ludum Dare and similar code-sprints, it's pretty common to > have multiple people working on the same files at the same time. Having > a shared editor makes it faster and easier to draw attention to exactly > where one person needs help. It's also great for teaching (when you > aren't physically in front of the same computer), or for onboarding new > team members. Screen (the terminal multiplexer) can be used to similar > effect, but the ability to simultaneously edit the *same* file is > specific to emacs. I don't understand what you expect Emacs to do in these use cases. If we process inputs from several clients as they arrive, we could produce results that are unexpected and even disastrous. For example, suppose we receive C-x from one client followed by C-u from another followed by C-s from the first one -- if we process these in the order they were received, the result will be none of what the two clients intended. Maybe you thought that our input code will process input in chunks of complete sequences, and thus avoid the above-mentioned disasters, but then (a) I think we will need a very thorough restructuring of the current code in keyboard.c, as it currently decides on this dynamically; and (b) you will still have the same problem if the user of one client types C-x and then pauses for some reason. So I'm afraid I don't see what kind of solution is sought for here, please clarify. > > In any case, we thank you for your interest in Emacs and look forward > > to seeing your contributions, but I suggest to start your legal > > paperwork rolling now, because changes you are talking about will > > probably be non-trivial in length, so we will need a copyright > > assignment from you in order to accept the changes. If you agree, I > > can send you the form to fill and the instructions to go with it. > > I have no problem assigning copyright for my work on FSF projects to the > FSF. I live in Eastern Washington, and am self employed, so getting > the paperwork done should be about as trivial as it can be. Thanks, I will send the form off-list.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 39687) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Feb 2020 08:23:33 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Feb 21 03:23:33 2020 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46325 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j53au-00035z-U2 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 21 Feb 2020 03:23:33 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:35292) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1j53at-00035k-Ky for 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 21 Feb 2020 03:23:32 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:44844) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1j53an-0004mo-Fn; Fri, 21 Feb 2020 03:23:25 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2544 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1j53am-0004la-U5; Fri, 21 Feb 2020 03:23:25 -0500 Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 10:23:14 +0200 Message-Id: <83mu9cjqml.fsf@HIDDEN> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> To: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> In-reply-to: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> (message from Logan Perkins on Wed, 19 Feb 2020 21:01:30 -0800) Subject: Re: bug#39687: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking keyboards References: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 39687 Cc: 39687 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) > From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> > Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 21:01:30 -0800 > > Is there some further reason to lock the keyboard that I haven't > considered? Can we back up a little, and discuss the use cases where the current behavior presents a limitation? Is quitting in the other clients the only one, or are there more? Also, are you implicitly saying that several persons work simultaneously vis-à-vis the same Emacs server? Because if not, I'm not sure I understand how simultaneous need to input from different clients could even happen. > Should I make the behavior depend on some elisp function? I think that > might be the easiest way to support the "minibuffer in use" message and > the like, but I'm not sure what the downside would be. > > Is it a waste of time for me to submit patches related to this feature? > If there's zero interest in adding this, or it would be less work for > someone else to write it than review my patches, I won't waste your time > sending them. Speaking for myself, I think the interest depends on the relevant use cases where the current behavior implies restrictions. Thus my questions above. In any case, we thank you for your interest in Emacs and look forward to seeing your contributions, but I suggest to start your legal paperwork rolling now, because changes you are talking about will probably be non-trivial in length, so we will need a copyright assignment from you in order to accept the changes. If you agree, I can send you the form to fill and the instructions to go with it.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Feb 2020 06:29:48 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Feb 20 01:29:47 2020 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43741 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j4fLF-0000VB-Pa for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 01:29:47 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:59232) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <logan@HIDDEN>) id 1j4dy3-0004gn-GA for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:01:43 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49177) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <logan@HIDDEN>) id 1j4dy2-0000F6-3t for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:01:43 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <logan@HIDDEN>) id 1j4dy0-0004Y2-Pw for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:01:41 -0500 Received: from host29.netdorm.com ([64.182.105.29]:36626 helo=gw1.litvpn.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <logan@HIDDEN>) id 1j4dy0-0004Wx-Iw for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:01:40 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.43] (unknown [63.227.187.208]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gw1.litvpn.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5CF114079C for <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN>; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:01:48 -0500 (EST) To: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN Subject: 26.3; Add customize-variable option for not locking keyboards From: Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN> Message-ID: <3a518d18-cc99-195b-42a9-adc8ef764d67@HIDDEN> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 21:01:30 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 64.182.105.29 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 01:29:44 -0500 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) In GNU Emacs 26.3 (build 1, x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.24.11) of 2020-01-28 built on gentoo-server Windowing system distributor 'The X.Org Foundation', version 11.0.12005000 System Description: Gentoo Base System release 2.6 This is a feature request more than a bug report. When using the built-in server (either via `emacs --daemon` or `server-start`) + emacsclient, use of the minibuffer from one client completely blocks other clients (they can't even quit until the mini buffer finishes). This is governed by calls to `temporarily_switch_to_single_kboard(struct frame *f)` in `keyboard.c`. If I understand correctly, there are two reasons for locking other clients while the minibuffer is in use. First, the input for the minibuffer is stored in a single global variable; while enabling recursive minibuffers is possible, bottom line is there can only be *one* active mini buffer at a time. Locking secondary inputs reduces the potential for confusion with fighting over the minibuffer. Additionally, sometimes there is something which requires a user response (such as confirmation on killing a modified buffer), and resolving that is simpler if the state isn't changing in the background. On the other hand, even with a confirmation box open, a user can switch away from the minibuffer and continue changing state (potentially even opening a recursive minibuffer), so I don't think the second case is sufficient cause to disallow multi-keyboard mode when the minibuffer is in use. As for the first issue, I don't think the present behavior is clearly best, as it doesn't *ignore* secondary keyboard input, it *queues* it, executing it in one block when the minibuffer ends. This can cause unexpected issues for novice users. Also, the inability to even close the client (short of SIGTERMing it) is not ideal. I've gutted the `temporarily_switch_to_single_kboard(struct frame *f)` in `keyboard.c` on a test system, and successfully used it with multiple people sharing a single server instance (on a joint project), and it works reasonably well. I'd like to propose adding a customizeable variable in the `minibuffer` group which disables locking the other keyboards. Ideally, the other clients should get a "minibuffer in use" message in their minibuffers so users can see when someone is using the minibuffer. I am happy to work on this, and submit patches for it, but would appreciate some advice before I start. Is there some further reason to lock the keyboard that I haven't considered? I think it's better to use the customizeable variable to prevent the call to temporarily_switch_to_single_kboard, rather than have that function not do what it's name implies it does. Should I intercept all calls to it based on one new variable? Or should I split general minibuffer use from confirmation uses, and so on? (Looks like 3-4 different places it's called in the source). Should I make the behavior depend on some elisp function? I think that might be the easiest way to support the "minibuffer in use" message and the like, but I'm not sure what the downside would be. Is it a waste of time for me to submit patches related to this feature? If there's zero interest in adding this, or it would be less work for someone else to write it than review my patches, I won't waste your time sending them. Regards, Logan Perkins
Logan Perkins <logan@HIDDEN>:bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN.
Full text available.bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#39687; Package emacs.
Full text available.
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.