GNU bug report logs -
#72692
Emacs 31.05 (40eecd594ac) get SIGSEGV on Linux (Linux 6.6.45 Kde Wayland)
Previous Next
Reported by: Eval EXEC <execvy <at> gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2024 08:31:01 UTC
Severity: normal
Done: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
> Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 06:28:32 +0000
> From: Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>
> Cc: execvy <at> gmail.com, 72692 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>
> "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>
> > Here's one data point: this kind of problem has never, NEVER happened
> > to me, although I display non-ASCII text in my Emacs sessions quite a
> > lot. So if what you describe is so trivially easy to trigger, how
> > come it didn't happen to me, in all the years I'm using this code?
>
> It isn't trivially easy to trigger at all! To trigger it reliably, you
> need to:
>
> * apply the patch so we don't reuse fontset table entries, which
> otherwise hides the bug
But the OP didn't use that patch. And your description sounded like
the problem could happen quite frequently even without that patch.
> * modify the mode line to use two new non-ASCII faces, at once, by
> inserting two characters provided by different fonts
Why does it have to be the mode line? why not buffer text? Mixing
different fonts (i.e. non-ASCII faces) in the same buffer is quite
common in Emacs; e.g., try "C-h h".
Also, why do we need more than one non-ASCII face to trigger the
problem?
> * modify the right frame parameter (such as alpha-background) so that
> the basic faces are re-realized ('free_realized_face' is called for
> them), but 'free_realized_faces' is not.
Basic faces are routinely freed and re-realized whenever we start the
display iteration, see init_iterator. AFAIR, all you need to do for
that is to customize some face -- doing so sets the face_change flag,
and init_iterator will then normally free all the faces and realize
them again.
> * be unlucky in your choice of malloc implementation
"Unlucky" in what sense?
And if all the users of GNU/Linux (i.e. glibc) are thus "unlucky",
this still leaves us with many potential victims.
> In particular, I'd like to understand why we need to use two non-ASCII
> faces at once.
Maybe I don't understand the question, but we need a new non-ASCII
face each time we find a character for which existing non-ASCII faces
don't have a glyph.
This bug report was last modified 257 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.