[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#31373: 26.1; frame-list-z-order segfaults on initial daemon frame
From: |
Noam Postavsky |
Subject: |
bug#31373: 26.1; frame-list-z-order segfaults on initial daemon frame |
Date: |
Mon, 7 May 2018 14:08:19 -0400 |
On 7 May 2018 at 13:59, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>> Date: Mon, 07 May 2018 08:26:01 +0200
>> From: martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>
>>
>> - if (XFRAME (frame)->output_data.x->parent_desc == children[i]
>> - || FRAME_OUTER_WINDOW (XFRAME (frame)) == children[i])
>> + if (FRAME_X_P (frame)
>> + && (XFRAME (frame)->output_data.x->parent_desc ==
>> children[i]
>> + || FRAME_OUTER_WINDOW (XFRAME (frame)) == children[i]))
>>
>> Thank you. Eli, I think Noam should push this to 26.1, if still
>> possible.
>
> Why? The workaround is very simple: don't call that function in a
> daemon session that has no GUI frames.
Ah, I think you missed that the segfault happens in a daemon session
that *does* have GUI frames.
I would also note that w32_frame_list_z_order makes the equivalent
FRAME_W32_P check via x_window_to_frame.
- bug#31373: 26.1; frame-list-z-order segfaults on initial daemon frame, (continued)
- bug#31373: 26.1; frame-list-z-order segfaults on initial daemon frame, martin rudalics, 2018/05/07
- bug#31373: 26.1; frame-list-z-order segfaults on initial daemon frame, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/05/07
- bug#31373: 26.1; frame-list-z-order segfaults on initial daemon frame,
Noam Postavsky <=
- bug#31373: 26.1; frame-list-z-order segfaults on initial daemon frame, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/05/07
- bug#31373: 26.1; frame-list-z-order segfaults on initial daemon frame, Noam Postavsky, 2018/05/07