From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id 8K3qHLhQ4GDeTQAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 03 Jul 2021 13:57:44 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id gGuhGLhQ4GDUAgAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 03 Jul 2021 11:57:44 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D35D412CA9 for ; Sat, 3 Jul 2021 13:57:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:57410 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lzeHF-0006yP-If for larch@yhetil.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2021 07:57:41 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51298) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lzeGc-0006xs-Dw; Sat, 03 Jul 2021 07:57:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:54669) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lzeGc-0000Lz-62; Sat, 03 Jul 2021 07:57:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lzeGb-0002QP-Tq; Sat, 03 Jul 2021 07:57:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#12972: [PATCH] Avoid regression in mailcap-view-file similar to Bug#44824 Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2021 11:57:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 12972 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs,org-mode X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Maxim Nikulin Received: via spool by 12972-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B12972.16253133909283 (code B ref 12972); Sat, 03 Jul 2021 11:57:01 +0000 Received: (at 12972) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Jul 2021 11:56:30 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37982 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lzeG6-0002Pf-Fh for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2021 07:56:30 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:53480) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lzeG2-0002PO-Ts for 12972@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2021 07:56:28 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:39902) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lzeFx-0008Sx-Km; Sat, 03 Jul 2021 07:56:21 -0400 Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:1940 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lzeFw-0003u4-Jw; Sat, 03 Jul 2021 07:56:21 -0400 Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2021 14:56:20 +0300 Message-Id: <83im1ripaz.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii In-Reply-To: <1825a6f3-0175-2d67-5608-41c9fb93889b@gmail.com> (message from Maxim Nikulin on Sat, 3 Jul 2021 18:29:30 +0700) References: <87r1hmdqek.fsf__16088.3597027109$1622530682$gmane$org@gnus.org> <835yxtlw14.fsf__2546.8955327355$1625164803$gmane$org@gnu.org> <1ddf1c46-0a28-4a2d-cc40-094ff74ee0ac@gmail.com> <837di8ki24.fsf__46278.4886871063$1625229533$gmane$org@gnu.org> <831r8gk4m0.fsf__14172.0669272885$1625246977$gmane$org@gnu.org> <1825a6f3-0175-2d67-5608-41c9fb93889b@gmail.com> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: 12972@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1625313464; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:resent-cc:resent-from:resent-sender: resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references: list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post; bh=wx+8kz6j04wF8HtsAQaVCj6/DBqiyUKg/D+1s6Pmq1s=; b=RsB0wugioUeWVvaGChIN8a9/KpCV8MjYHihYebnmkNBcqpdzd3LygA6J1EVOtXwxgFfqDR +T5lmpavjlQgw7t8XkqXUKRBy4RA7EeTkTwVtVuiKATTLhofkbJvCxMWr0NnYn9p48dxBq DEgx9YfgD4vRacKRl2Ifm/ZjL9/x64TirbiMviCLSMohiH6VZiu/GRtojtzJGrBSEK6p4a jCjMoAbFrbR7GWK7zXalkd4ofkNh5Vxz1AwqK4kzoODEzh7ZDyUdMl6bTNwHudaVqkovrl Ze9R7iQJUEwJuLr4K/vodKkVLvXWB1SOHCuX1H21Lxdk5JLA/kfaorjVBPJjaw== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1625313464; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=G9cCgji1s3zFMx0B4OgIx1uuCrkQa8SVJhjGGkSVeHpzJ34nPHIafmje+8mCEHXE5ZsU+n zqUCLcHKgoRkAa9JCGtbGQKL//57IMiDAzl6zHO/6VbvliTZMilJbc8ZUiElJpP5JBOAHv zRtiFsTwHqM5gJZyGZNUeBzYWUHVZSyr5g3fCr3GeBP8hXVstP9OzaLCt9Ya1XdLd1ky9G BoBcV+wRD9NlLpov3rh48sdrlq45Lxu+6qr28HgDq73w6P+GYmxOsHUOdduF28Vo1iYxT2 014DHifFhMziQ/yPYuNpSD+5tb6UhGESbuGaZC/CgGNAht8sjxRgncjCRiC9zw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -2.91 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: D35D412CA9 X-Spam-Score: -2.91 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: u1VQMyfRwh+A > From: Maxim Nikulin > Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2021 18:29:30 +0700 > > I am giving up with this issue. That's too bad. I see no reason to give up, and I urge you to reconsider, please. > >> Because of I can not imagine such case for mailcap handler in Emacs yet > >> and, accordingly to you, "this could be an incompatible behavior change". > > > > You don't need to imagine it, you just need to trust me that I know > > what I'm talking about: it would be an incompatible change. > > Is it a kind of Church of Emacs that I have to just believe in you? It isn't a church, but some kind of trust cannot harm. > Previous time you were trying to convince me that unconditional 'pipe is > perfectly safe when I was unsure concerning behavior on Windows. It is indeed safe for Windows, because Emacs on Windows always uses pipes (as PTYs are not available there). My concern here is for systems other than Windows and other than those where you saw the issue. Your patch unconditionally assumes that every handler will immediately exit, and that it doesn't care about the connection type with the parent Emacs process, but that is not guaranteed to be true. What I'm asking is to let some kind of "fire escape" for users who could be adversely affected by this assumption. Ideally, some automatic detection of the handlers that need pipes would be the best. If that is not feasible, at least an option to control process-connection-type would be enough. > You prefer to keep reasons of your objections unveiled. I see no issue > with the patch. It can be by a few lines shorter but the price is worse > user experience. I have no idea how to move further. I explained the issue I have with unconditionally changing the interface. I have explained it above again. I hope it is clear enough. > Finally, the patch touches month-old unreleased code, so I see no point > to discuss that it is "incompatible". Hmm... that's true. So I guess an option to use PTYs should be good enough here. > P.S. It was my fault to use `make-process' in Org since the function is > not available in Emacs-24. I'm sorry for that incompatibility. Great, thanks. So I think it should be easy to adjust your patch to have a variable that controls process-connection-type, and then it could be installed.