On 2015-04-27 20:52:15 -0400, The Wanderer wrote: > On 04/27/2015 at 08:44 PM, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > I completely agree. I would never do that. Writing a shell function > > that greps out the Gtk-WARNING lines may be better. > > Not ideal, though, since there are (as I understand matters) often but > not necessarily always blank lines in between these Gtk-WARNING lines. > So either you cut out just the WARNING lines and still have scrolliness > because of the blank lines making it through, or you snip out the > adjacent lines and risk killing other information. (Or you make your > script potentially quite a bit more complicated.)
Yes, one can write a small script that also removes blank lines that come after a Gtk-WARNING line. One just has to hope that no full buffering is done when stderr is piped to a filter. > > Are these messages output by the GTK library itself or reported to > > Emacs or output by emacs itself? > > > > Having output in a library (except for output functions, of course) > > is bad practice (possibly except critical errors, like assertion > > failure or memory corruption, which could mean an imminent crash or > > possible data loss). Errors should be reported to the caller. > > Given the sheer number of different programs which I've seen output them > (this includes iceweasel and icedove), I rather suspect they're output > by the library itself. I think I researched this more specifically once, > but if so I forget the details. This is also what I suspect. -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150428012425.ga24...@xvii.vinc17.org
