From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#31271: 25.2; exported deleted RMAIL emails should have theit deleted flag reset Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2018 11:05:29 +0300 Message-ID: <83a7s4tmeu.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83o9hcgf0h.fsf@gnu.org> <83po19ec1r.fsf@gnu.org> <83wovd9t3v.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1528531445 17958 195.159.176.226 (9 Jun 2018 08:04:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2018 08:04:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 31271-done@debbugs.gnu.org To: Francesco =?UTF-8?Q?Potort=C3=AC?= Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 09 10:04:01 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fRYqu-0004XZ-7N for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Jun 2018 10:04:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39393 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fRYt1-0007PG-CT for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Jun 2018 04:06:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41716) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fRYsv-0007Ow-C4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jun 2018 04:06:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fRYss-0006zI-7E for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jun 2018 04:06:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:60612) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fRYss-0006zD-3o for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jun 2018 04:06:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fRYsr-0001UU-SL for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jun 2018 04:06:01 -0400 Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2018 08:06:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 31271 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Mail-Followup-To: 31271@debbugs.gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org, pot@gnu.org Original-Received: via spool by 31271-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D31271.15285315465705 (code D ref 31271); Sat, 09 Jun 2018 08:06:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 31271-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jun 2018 08:05:46 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40275 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fRYsc-0001Tx-Ed for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jun 2018 04:05:46 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50661) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fRYsb-0001Tk-BH for 31271-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jun 2018 04:05:45 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fRYsS-0006uK-V6 for 31271-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jun 2018 04:05:40 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:44490) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fRYsK-0006sY-ID; Sat, 09 Jun 2018 04:05:28 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2599 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1fRYsJ-0004j8-2g; Sat, 09 Jun 2018 04:05:27 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Francesco =?UTF-8?Q?Potort=C3=AC?= on Tue, 05 Jun 2018 18:13:47 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:147226 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 18:13:47 +0200 > From: Francesco Potortì > Cc: 31271@debbugs.gnu.org > > >What about the question I asked: > > > >> What about invoking 'o' with a prefix argument -- should it stop > >> ignoring deleted messages when it looks for the N-1 additional > >> messages to output to a file, when this option is set non-nil? > > Sorry, I had missed that one. > > >The code I posted still ignores deleted messages, except for the > >message that is current when the command is invoked. Is that > >reasonable? > > I'd say it is reasonable, but I am not sure. > > Suggestion: when the new option is set to t, RMAIL ignores the deleted > flag (that is, it goes through all messages, deleted or not) and asks > for confirmation for every deleted message it meets. The archived > message has its deleted flag cleared. > > This behaviour is not surprising, it is consistent, it does not break > old macros because you have to set the new option to t. OK, done as suggested, and closing the bug report. The change is on the master branch.