[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: long-standing GTK bug
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: long-standing GTK bug |
Date: |
Mon, 10 May 2021 11:00:08 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Robert Pluim [2021-05-10 16:45:05] wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 10 May 2021 10:40:20 -0400, Stefan Monnier
>>>>>> <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> said:
> Stefan> IIUC the difference (with the patch) is between stopping ssh via
> `C-c` or
> Stefan> via `kill`. I wonder why this matters, and I think it's not at
> all
> Stefan> obvious if an "abrupt" network disconnection would be more like
> `C-c` or
> Stefan> more like `kill`.
> In the 'C-c' case Emacs has had a chance to clean up its internal
> state (with the patch applied).
Why? What does ssh do that is gentler?
> With 'kill' weʼre pulling the rug out from under GTK (see the
> backtrace several messages up-thread).
I suspect it then also depends on the `kill` signal.
In my WM (ctwm), I can also distinguish between `f.delete` and
`f.destroy` where the first sends something like a WM_DELETE request to
the application (which Emacs treats via `handle-delete-frame`, IIRC)
whereas `f.destroy` asks the X server to cut the connection AFAIK.
Would `f.destroy` be more like the `C-c` or the `kill` case of ssh?
Stefan
- Re: long-standing GTK bug, Adam Sjøgren, 2021/05/08
- Re: long-standing GTK bug, Robert Pluim, 2021/05/09
- Re: long-standing GTK bug, Adam Sjøgren, 2021/05/09
- Re: long-standing GTK bug, Robert Pluim, 2021/05/10
- Re: long-standing GTK bug, Adam Sjøgren, 2021/05/10
- Re: long-standing GTK bug, Robert Pluim, 2021/05/10
- Re: long-standing GTK bug, Adam Sjøgren, 2021/05/10
- Re: long-standing GTK bug, Óscar Fuentes, 2021/05/10
- Re: long-standing GTK bug, Stefan Monnier, 2021/05/10
- Re: long-standing GTK bug, Robert Pluim, 2021/05/10
- Re: long-standing GTK bug,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: long-standing GTK bug, Robert Pluim, 2021/05/11
Re: long-standing GTK bug, 황병희, 2021/05/09