From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#9243: 24.0.50; Gnus keeps seeing 101 unread spam Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2012 04:25:04 +0100 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1325906730 20334 80.91.229.12 (7 Jan 2012 03:25:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2012 03:25:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 9243@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 07 04:25:26 2012 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 1RjMuM-0003Ys-Bg for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 07 Jan 2012 04:25:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36370 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RjMuL-00017o-SJ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 22:25:25 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:37312) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RjMuI-00017Y-Rf for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 22:25:23 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RjMuH-0006tP-Hu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 22:25:22 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:52722) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RjMuH-0006tL-F2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 22:25:21 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RjMuH-0000H6-1f; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 22:25:21 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, bugs@gnus.org Resent-Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2012 03:25:20 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 9243 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs,gnus X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 9243-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B9243.13259067171046 (code B ref 9243); Sat, 07 Jan 2012 03:25:20 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9243) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Jan 2012 03:25:17 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47394 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RjMuC-0000Gp-Jj for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 22:25:16 -0500 Original-Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]:53317) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RjMu8-0000Gc-7g for 9243@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 22:25:14 -0500 Original-Received: from cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no ([84.215.51.58] helo=stories.gnus.org) by hermes.netfonds.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RjMu0-00019k-Lj; Sat, 07 Jan 2012 04:25:04 +0100 Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAHlBMVEVUR0sXEhJMPkJENjpP LzNla31XU1tGMTbCs7w6KiyoVH34AAACTklEQVQ4jXWTPWsbQRCGhzsjcKcDJXDdsgsK6uQdbJgu hYq4dZCwOxGjI/4FwV2ahCt1tyEw/zbvzurkfDgDkk7Pu/OxM3PUv2rbLb0u9P3/he7QHXaHbvu3 UfcvK8Kgx9nhNYFj9wefIiAUzKQdHip22R9PRdh757rJcxd4pJqIZlVgHsYJd5cNbEmsOmjTLicM 3vb9x5+UZb05lLwdPlfNB9xvDWEs4GT71aLb3vd31LCfGSGXf2tJSHuxmZFwJJCZRwXO+Rh4WQ+I QqLsun3Fmpij8yyaXJUckapy5Pw/cp2GXIuvPTliGDRlDqzGm32IMWYPTaoSVAq+fvAI6qnVs4G2 n3GHUXzlqPmdv7HhtT4i+TBRBJqXqTYpRKuqnJ7O9/1VG72nF95Me/C1xRRMKOW8PW/IpQ8ON5+E M/+efPAvHvMzRys8m0fmCxvUfd9/y73w72ji06rsMk+c6BRolrdid9h9QjfvnlSYCn9P2faEnqVQ YwZoIhrUzI3TRsa0PQrzs/9CA/ii8FuVeONTzhHYcligC/ReNCZWydPMOX5YmMzrWsi4KEJtLjaw Z+XjUo/RBhdUqVlkvLlN17GWkSVfuHgUHuT+gQWjL6OeBGzD2GnEKrHtEb7JjiBqkrwTPDJfZsGK QIFojh3IDz7m94KCrHFWsuMp7+hXSXEPXocVy8oEsQ3DqZSIn3jUlQaTVFvBisAdQuAjIgcLZEu5 fhxzd7H3eakrydCWOzziy0OIbl2namX587tQO9wzETq8xHazpWSU50MIMsZfhq6DYZ6n8AcAAAAA SUVORK5CYII= X-Now-Playing: Simple Minds's _Life in a Day_: "Pleasantly Disturbed" In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Fri, 06 Jan 2012 21:45:14 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-MailScanner-ID: 1RjMu0-00019k-Lj MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1326511505.55193@PBhqWVDRZHCbfP/PlrznDw X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list 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:55463 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: > AFAIK my use case is not completely unusual (typically connected via > a NAT router to my university's IMAP server) and I see this problem more > or less *every day*. > So I really hope you can try to fix this soon. > FWIW I never saw this problem with the old nnimap backend, so it's > a (very serious if you ask me) regression w.r.t Emacs-23. I've had a look at the nnimap in Emacs 23 to see whether I've missed something, but it looks to me like that nnimap did exactly the same thing as the Emacs 24 one does: `nnimap-request-set-mark' is called on group exit, and that's basically it. (Marks are also altered when you move messages and stuff, but for normal reading, `nnimap-request-set-mark' on group exit is the main thing.) So I don't understand how this has changed, really. > And I think it is related to the agent, because the connection death > would be handled differently without the agent: the connection would be > re-established and the command re-tried, whereas with the new > "connection death silently puts the agent in offline mode", the command > just gets dropped on the floor. Oh, yeah, that's a definite possibility. Did you use to get an "go offline?" query on group exit? In that case, that does sound like a definite possible culprit, and shouldn't be difficult to reproduce and fix... > That's probably what's going on (each folder is stored as a large single > file). Can the expunging be done asynchronously? Not fully without opening a second connection to the IMAP server. One could just send off the "EXPUNGE" and not wait for the result, but it means that the next IMAP command will have to wait instead, which will feel like random hangs... -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/