GNU bug report logs -
#56025
29.0.50; em-extpipe-test-2 times out on EMBA and Cygwin
Previous Next
Reported by: Ken Brown <kbrown <at> cornell.edu>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2022 18:36:02 UTC
Severity: normal
Found in version 29.0.50
Fixed in version 29.1
Done: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
On 6/27/2022 6:25 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
> Thanks to all of you for working on this while I was gone.
> Unfortunately, the problem is still present on Cygwin. In my haste to
> get away, I neglected to mention that there is apparently a timing issue
> in Eshell on Cygwin, so that even three EOFs do not always suffice to
> kill the process.
>
> My test case is to run
>
> echo bar | sh -c rev
>
> in Eshell. For reasons I don't understand, EOF almost always has to be
> sent more than 3 times times before the "sh" process dies. The maximum
> I've observed is 93. Inserting "(sit-for 0.01)" after each EOF
> eliminates the need for extra EOFs; this is why I referred to the
> problem as a timing issue.
>
> I propose the following workaround:
>
> --- a/lisp/eshell/esh-io.el
> +++ b/lisp/eshell/esh-io.el
> @@ -284,10 +284,16 @@ eshell-close-target
> ;; end-of-file to the reading process. However, some platforms
> ;; (e.g. Solaris) actually require sending a *third* EOF. Since
> ;; sending extra EOFs while the process is running shouldn't break
> - ;; anything, we'll just send the maximum we'd ever need. See
> - ;; bug#56025 for further details.
> - (let ((i 0))
> - (while (and (<= (cl-incf i) 3)
> + ;; anything, we'll send up to three on all platforms.
> +
> + ;; There's an extra wrinkle on Cygwin where, apparently due to an
> + ;; unknown timing issue, it sometimes takes more than three EOFs
> + ;; to kill the process. (This only happens in Eshell, not in an
> + ;; ordinary Cygwin shell.) We work around this problem by sending
> + ;; up to 1000 EOFs on Cygwin. See bug#56025 for further details.
> + (let ((i 0)
> + (n (if (eq system-type 'cygwin) 1000 3)))
> + (while (and (<= (cl-incf i) n)
> (eq (process-status target) 'run))
> (process-send-eof target))))
I'd be very hesitant to do this, since as you mention above, this seems
like a timing issue, and it's entirely possible that there are other,
more widespread issues on Cygwin here. We'd also want to check the
system that the process is actually running on; otherwise, remoting into
a Cygwin system (via Tramp) would still exhibit the problem. I'll see if
I can get a Cygwin environment up to test things out in the next week-ish.
If there's no other way that we can come up with here, I'd lean towards
a defcustom so that users can tweak this if needed.
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 352 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.