Re: Please test the merge of the concurrency branch

[Karl Fogel]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
>I've pushed to the Emacs Git repository a new branch named
>'test-concurrency'.  It's the result of merging the concurrency branch
>with a week-old master, followed by fixing a few bugs I found (after
>resolving the merge conflicts).
>
>This is tested on Trisquel GNU/Linux (x86_64 build) and on MS-Windows
>(x86 build with wide ints).  "Tested" here means that it builds,
>passes the test suite as well as the master version on the same
>machine, passes the new tests that test the concurrency features, and
>the basic functionalities that are affected by the concurrency-related
>changes -- subprocesses and networking -- work as well as they do on
>master.
>
>The new concurrency features are not thoroughly tested, so I expect
>bugs to be reported when people start using them seriously.  I don't
>think that should preclude us from landing this on master, though, as
>long as the "usual", a.k.a. "single-threaded" Emacs works as well as
>the master branch.
>
>I'd appreciate if people who can afford it checked out this branch and
>tested it on their systems, to make the probability of bad problems,
>which I estimate as low, to be even lower, and thus to avoid the
>danger of breaking master too hard.

Built revision ad03e7af8 to get "GNU Emacs 26.0.50.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ 
Version 3.22.4) of 2016-12-09" (on a Debian GNU/Linux 'testing' distro, 
dist-upgraded as of this morning).

I used Emacs with no issues for a few hours, including running two shell 
buffers (often with simultaneous active command output), reading/writing email 
with Gnus, and doing various Org Mode things.

By the way, I also built an earlier revision (I don't remember the rev id now) 
from the branch, and used it for about an hour, likewise with no problems.  
Then at some point I did 'git pull' and was surprised to get a merge -- 
surprised, because I had no local modifications.  I assume this means you or 
someone rebased the branch at some point?  Anyway, I just deleted the branch 
locally and refetched it, resulting in rev ad03e7af8, which I then built and 
used for the rest of the day.

Best regards,
-Karl