X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=kfoUuBLRHonDMxO7L0yl+7/27c/4mibwinNFjM2b6DJ/jKYpdhkA1
	H7L7UlroRTHgzjZjRUGVsdue//aeCAC1t3jZTDsfin5O+d3kHAU0BL6NeRgD+VTx
	flM4pjLxA6XG0wEq+WOtB9CWjOvpLThbqywloIFacjJhyoLQRkXgkE=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default;
	bh=F4dY98VuAJOmcd/YFLp6qgVbFqE=; b=fy22AFaou/zPu58AOwA8A778wrUA
	iYxzaDE3cPW1ec7fOg9GIQq5GpX105dS8kA+g8tgd9fDFJzg7k6sbcdKgOoPf4/7
	KGO4I7vdl3zL3v2Mj+j1bDCssMxXQwK6tPbwQ5a5dcm2VoFdaLZUP7qHBcsgh4re
	Cya5EJW0qSKwYEA=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO:	mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org
X-Mail-Handler:	Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn
X-Report-Abuse-To:	abuse AT dyndns DOT com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
X-MHO-User:	U2FsdGVkX18y1do/etdtA3vI0Qu1zepA
Date:	Tue, 3 Dec 2013 16:10:58 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Please try newest snapshot (was Re: emacs-x11: new clipboard size limitation?)
Message-ID:	<20131203211058.GB6179@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<ac98a224051c2e59d2a1a0d455717531 AT mhoenicka DOT de> <529C8716 DOT 7020601 AT dronecode DOT org DOT uk> <20131202141740 DOT GC11800 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <529C9F81 DOT 5060900 AT dronecode DOT org DOT uk> <20131203103129 DOT GG11800 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20131203112830 DOT GH11800 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <529E0D3B DOT 8020505 AT dronecode DOT org DOT uk>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<529E0D3B.8020505@dronecode.org.uk>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 04:56:27PM +0000, Jon TURNEY wrote:
>Tried bisecting through the X server versions for the past 6 months, and it
>seems that this problem first appears in X server 1.14.3-2
>
>(As an aside, it's probably relevant to the recent discussion, that I can't
>find the thread for, about how many previous versions we should keep around
>that it's not possible to do this bisection without 'Secret Knowledge' at the
>moment)
>
>This does contain a few clipboard changes, and in particular it changes the
>way the messages get processed so we will return to the select() more often
>(after each stage of the conversion operation), which it looks like it could
>be incorrect sometimes, but I'd expect this to cause unneeded blocking
>(waiting in select() for a message which has already been placed on the event
>queue by XPending() rather than the observed behaviour.
>
>Anyhow, I guess I need to look at this some more...
>
>> Talking about wndproc.c, it only checks iReturn for being < 0.  After
>> that, we don't really know which value it has, we only know that
>> FD_ISSET(iConnNumber, &fdsRead) returns 0.  The value of iReturn should
>> be printed in the debug output at line 133.
>
>It's 0 when I inspect it with the debugger, but yes, I'll change that.
>
>> What kind of object is the iConnNumber descriptor?  Pipe?  Fifo?
>> Socket?  /dev/windows?  We really need a simple testcase without the 
>> X and emacs overhead...
>
>It's a socket connected to the X server.

I added an ugly hack to work around this symptom in the latest cygwin.
It shouldn't have any big impact on anything but this particular
scenario but I would appreciate it if people downloaded today's snapshot
and verified that things are still working ok.

I plan on addressing the actual problem for Cygwin 1.7.28.

cgf

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -