From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28836 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2008 15:46:09 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 Received: from news.dotsrc.org (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.247.88) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 1 Oct 2008 15:46:09 -0000 Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at sunsite.dk does not designate permitted sender hosts) Received: (qmail 56106 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2008 15:45:51 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 1 Oct 2008 15:45:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 6741 invoked by alias); 1 Oct 2008 15:45:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 25795 Received: (qmail 6718 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2008 15:45:31 -0000 Received: from bifrost.dotsrc.org (130.225.254.106) by sunsite.dk with SMTP; 1 Oct 2008 15:45:31 -0000 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.178]) by bifrost.dotsrc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 375A080524CB for ; Wed, 1 Oct 2008 17:45:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id m28so323795wag.29 for ; Wed, 01 Oct 2008 08:45:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=XrliUu/dwfRVsVkzr49uPBwEa+QmOJZ4/bCAPbrr5xI=; b=GllKNSzfpIJfWF9cXsr6XRHDunLzUNCRYDhkx/B+kpxfjQLUoDfPswhFVSpoCgDc4D kuh5f6BziK2l2KH+xXKQmv314NC2lVUk/cfSY1/woSP6Cu+eTghzKr3jLFZEsGLV8DEl BLqI7QjX5IUIsXYKL+hn/Py/UopJl65hS84Uc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=w+Rql+LJ1fX15tcCRRvyFRVlPQDbahu8RTjWiU9s60ocByzk3Zs96k84rvkTYdRww1 QrlotlnXwx9GO/EdSdKcXzXGaWCvvfAOucGr3Fj4Os+0jIsBAoNFGSK+DPwv4yMi/YvQ YB5YkOOgXu8qfYWC2u8J/2OxBVWOvaqINSVlE= Received: by 10.114.255.1 with SMTP id c1mr9360996wai.67.1222875923074; Wed, 01 Oct 2008 08:45:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.159.2 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Oct 2008 08:45:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6cd6de210810010845s419fb67j324f3ca0fd28ffae@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 11:45:23 -0400 From: "Rocky Bernstein" To: "Peter Stephenson" Subject: Re: Help me track down a tough bug? (probably funcfiletrace, subshells and possibly I/O redirection) Cc: "Zsh hackers list" In-Reply-To: <20081001123107.1113468f@news01> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <6cd6de210809281219i4bf1ed18mefa45b967fa835a6@mail.gmail.com> <6cd6de210809290411m60cb669bk3817d768adce378a@mail.gmail.com> <200809291125.m8TBPsQM005256@news01.csr.com> <6cd6de210809290711j12363e1bo159e1739bae7b2fd@mail.gmail.com> <200809291425.m8TEPSoR007204@news01.csr.com> <20080929224209.1bd8f3f6@pws-pc> <6cd6de210809291718n2fa49590q42eaec499d106284@mail.gmail.com> <20080930175300.2e93fabf@news01> <6cd6de210809301059o64216c18wfb69491c5ff7b049@mail.gmail.com> <20081001123107.1113468f@news01> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92.1/8366/Wed Oct 1 12:44:34 2008 on bifrost X-Virus-Status: Clean On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 7:31 AM, Peter Stephenson wrote: > On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:59:43 -0400 > "Rocky Bernstein" wrote: >> My mistake. You are correct. This bug was introduced in paring down >> the program and removing an initial truncate output (leaving the >> subsequent append outputs). And I now see the answer to why output was >> disappearing in the subshell which was my initial concern. > > OK, so it seems there's currently nothing for me to look at here. Yep. Thanks for the help though. > >> Any thoughts on marking subshell level inside one of the stack traces >> or having return inside trap DEBUG with a negative number cause an >> immediate return? > > You can already force a return from the enclosing function from trap '...' > DEBUG just by executing "return". ... Ok. I've just committed a gdb-style "return" statement then. Thoughts about being able to see subshell nexting inside the various traces? (The level number really isn't needed, just a bit to indicate whether a new subshell was entered.) Thanks.