GNU bug report logs - #75292
31.0.50; igc: (file-error "Doing vfork" "Bad address")

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Ihor Radchenko <yantar92 <at> posteo.net>

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2025 17:53:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Found in version 31.0.50

Done: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log

Message #26 received at 75292 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: 75292 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, yantar92 <at> posteo.net
Subject: Re: bug#75292: 31.0.50; igc: (file-error "Doing vfork" "Bad address")
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2025 22:35:06 +0200

> Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2025 11:41:29 -0800
> Cc: 75292 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
> 
> On 2025-01-02 11:29, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >>>> Debugger entered--Lisp error: (file-error "Doing vfork" "Bad address")
> >>>>    (call-process-shell-command "grep -anE '^:(Sourc.URL\\+?):[ \11[]+https://curiouscoding\\.nl/posts/static-search-tree/[]]*$' '/home/yantar92/Org/rss_archive_2019.org'" nil t)
> ...
> > Could it be that this started happening when we began using
> > posix_spawn instead of vfork?
> 
> If Emacs uses posix_spawn instead of vfork, shouldn't file-error report 
> "Doing posix_spawn" instead of "Doing vfork"? Truth in advertising and 
> all that....

We should, but it looks like someone didn't want to condition the
value of CHILD_SETUP_ERROR_DESC by USABLE_POSIX_SPAWN...
This bug report was last modified 110 days ago.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.