From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#9831: cause of bug found! [PATCH] Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 11:19:43 +0200 Message-ID: <4EA3DC2F.9040303@gmx.at> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1319361648 10669 80.91.229.12 (23 Oct 2011 09:20:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 09:20:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 9831@debbugs.gnu.org To: mark.lillibridge@hp.com Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 23 11:20:44 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RHuEW-0001XK-C4 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 11:20:44 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53568 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RHuEV-0004CU-NS for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 05:20:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:33633) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RHuER-0004CI-Pt for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 05:20:41 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RHuEQ-0002Ue-Fk for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 05:20:39 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:34565) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RHuEQ-0002UZ-Ck for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 05:20:38 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RHuFm-0008TW-FZ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 05:22:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 09:22:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 9831 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 9831-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B9831.131936167732518 (code B ref 9831); Sun, 23 Oct 2011 09:22:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9831) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Oct 2011 09:21:17 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RHuF3-0008SR-5l for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 05:21:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.22]) by debbugs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RHuF0-0008SC-D9 for 9831@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 05:21:15 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 23 Oct 2011 09:19:43 -0000 Original-Received: from 62-47-45-42.adsl.highway.telekom.at (EHLO [62.47.45.42]) [62.47.45.42] by mail.gmx.net (mp070) with SMTP; 23 Oct 2011 11:19:43 +0200 X-Authenticated: #14592706 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+EDV1DGlmEmVzjnjzKELEHRla7si/OzxmLmaI684 4+e5Hw3YOYQC/N User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) In-Reply-To: X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 05:22:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:53033 Archived-At: > Because this bug doesn't occur in Emacs 22, I compared to that code's > version of rmail-summary: I'm not convinced that the issue you see is related to that reported by the OP. But since I'm not familiar with rmail could you please explain to me what happens and what should happen below. > [Rmail 22] > (defun rmail-summary () > "Display a summary of all messages, one line per message." > (interactive) > (rmail-new-summary "All" '(rmail-summary) nil)) > > [Rmail 23.3] > (defun rmail-summary () > "Display a summary of all messages, one line per message." > (interactive) > (rmail-new-summary "All" '(rmail-summary) nil) > (unless (get-buffer-window rmail-buffer) > (rmail-summary-beginning-of-message))) > > > As you can see, some well-meaning person added the functionality of > move-to-start-of-message to the display summary command ('h') and broke > rmail-output and associated functions. I checked and none of the other > summary generating functions (e.g., rmail-summary-by-labels) have this > functionality (added). I seem to understand that you show in some window a buffer called rmail-buffer, presumably containing some messages you read. Now you want to produce a summary in a buffer called rmail-summary-buffer and do this by invoking the command `rmail-summary'. That command winds up by calling `rmail-summary-show-message' which does `rmail-pop-to-buffer' on rmail-buffer (I don't understand why it does do that). Anyway, since that buffer already appears on some window, `rmail-summary-show-message' should in principle reuse that window and IIUC not change that window's point, i.e., not change what you see in that window. But if my summary is correct then (rmail-new-summary "All" '(rmail-summary) nil) should always make sure that rmail-buffer appears in some window and the test coming next (unless (get-buffer-window rmail-buffer) (rmail-summary-beginning-of-message))) should always fail (unless rmail-buffer is shown on another frame) so no such deliberate movement should occur. However, my summary apparently fails to tell what you see, so could you please tell me what happens instead and why? And, as mentioned above, I don't understand how what you describe here corresponds to the bug reported by John: His seems a problem with the command invoked by typing `o' yours when typing `h'. martin