Re: [STUMP] Hangs with run-shell-command

[Shawn Betts]

On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 8:03 AM, Ian Ross <address@hidden> wrote:
> Julian Stecklina <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>> Milan Zamazal <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>>     JS> Could you post this to the SBCL people? Perhaps you can build a
>>>     JS> minimal example outside of stumpwm. I guess, it would be quite
>>>     JS> helpful in solving this problem.
>>>
>>> I'll try when I have some time...
>>
>> I also have problems with a non-responsive stumpwm with SBCL 1.0.16. It
>> happened when I left my box unattended for the night. I'll try to
>> rewrite contrib/{cpu,battery}.lisp to not use run-shell-command. Perhaps
>> this makes a difference.
>
> I have a modified version of battery.lisp that doesn't use
> run-shell-command.  However, it uses split-sequence from the
> cl-utilities package, and I don't know how people feel about adding that
> sort of dependency to stumpwm.  I've put the code below for you to look
> at.  Any guidance on whether this would be acceptable as a patch?  (I
> seem to remember making some other changes at the same time, as I was
> having trouble with stumpwm hanging when the battery state changed.  I
> can figure out the differences needed just to remove the
> run-shell-command calls and offer those as a patch if that seems like a
> good idea.)

Given that the contrib/ stuff isn't built into stumpwm I think they
can require whatever libraries they want. Perhaps you could submit the
changes as individual diff patches? That will make it easier to
review. I don't use these modules so hopefully those who do can pipe
up if they see something problematic with them.

-Shawn