From xemacs-m  Wed Jan 15 07:18:47 1997
Received: from server21.digital.fr (server21.digital.fr [193.56.15.21])
          by xemacs.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id HAA21348 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 07:18:46 -0600 (CST)
Received: from mail.vbo.dec.com (mail.vbo.dec.com [16.36.208.34]) by server21.digital.fr (8.7.5/8.7) with ESMTP id MAA06123 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 12:30:54 +0100 (MET)
Received: from vbormc.vbo.dec.com (vbormc.vbo.dec.com [16.36.208.94]) by mail.vbo.dec.com (8.7.3/8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16903 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 12:28:48 +0100 (MET)
Received: from clusaz.gvc.dec.com (clusaz.gvc.dec.com [16.184.176.21]) by vbormc.vbo.dec.com (8.7.3/8.7) with SMTP id MAA26658 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 12:24:24 +0100
Received: from fornet.gvc.dec.com by clusaz.gvc.dec.com (5.65v3.2/1.1.10.5/04Jan97-0611PM)
	id AA16666; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 12:27:02 +0100
Received: by fornet.gvc.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/23Sep96-1024AM)
	id AA09955; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 12:26:50 +0100
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 12:26:50 +0100
Message-Id: <9701151126.AA09955@fornet.gvc.dec.com>
From: Steve Carney <carney@gvc.dec.com>
To: XEmacs Mailing List <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>
Subject: RE: 20.0-b90: some bugs
In-Reply-To: <199701150713.XAA28262@xemacs.eng.sun.com>
References: <18358.853186100@rtp.ericsson.se>
	<199701150713.XAA28262@xemacs.eng.sun.com>
Reply-To: carney@gvc.dec.com
X-Face: (d*XRr}%:j,s*8+_o];-"-<<Sd1>H?Ds*>_vV}6DVjhNkjSRW0z^9[WBrbtMma>lyW6u>r(
 9U_m6J0kh7U=q?(h[7<YtS!Cu[Yl)D_XSCy5+tw>_2qr&4S=n|A*ScV]5BR{3]YXk$!,4l2vh9B]}&
 0p"&#\I

mrb@eng.sun.com (Martin Buchholz) writes,
in <199701150713.XAA28262@xemacs.eng.sun.com>:

>I fixed a bug (accept-process-output) in 19.14 that had the exact same
>symptoms.  I checked the versions of accept-process-output between my
>personal workspace and Steven's (there is some slight divergence) and
>noticed that accept-process-output is different.  Perhaps the code in
>the following diff is responsible.  Where did this code come from???
>Would undoing this change fix the problem?

I applied the patch to 15b90 successfully, but get the following
compilation error:

  gcc -c -Demacs -DHAVE_CONFIG_H  -I. -I/kits/install/xemacs/beta/src 
      -D_BSD -I/usr/local/include -I/kits/install/xemacs/beta/src/../lwlib 
      -g -O2 event-stream.c
  event-stream.c: In function `Faccept_process_output':
  event-stream.c:2436: label `EXECUTE_INTERNAL' used but not defined

BTW, I did narrow the DUNIX ispell problem down to
accept-process-output.  It seems that accept-process-output is returning
nil.  Apparently, accept-process-output (or something it calls) is
returning before it should.  If I force a second evaluation of the
accept-process-output form in the ispell code, the expected information
is returned.

        Steve

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Steve Carney        TEL:[41](22)782.90.60  http://www-digital.cern.ch/carney/
carney@gvc.dec.com  FAX:[41](22)782.94.92 

