From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jesse Sheidlower Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#7987: 23.2; Refill error in message-mode Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:02:09 -0500 Message-ID: <20110210210209.GO293@panix.com> References: <8lr5bj60dx.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <20110208154418.GL22848@panix.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1297372660 22655 80.91.229.12 (10 Feb 2011 21:17:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 21:17:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 7987@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 10 22:17:35 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PndtO-0000sq-MH for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 22:17:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37009 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pndja-0004VI-Dh for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:07:26 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41070 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PndiX-0003Id-80 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:06:23 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PndiR-0000HE-DG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:06:16 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:53819) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PndiR-0000H2-BK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:06:15 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PndWc-0000hR-D4; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 15:54:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Jesse Sheidlower Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, bugs@gnus.org Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 20:54:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 7987 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs,gnus X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 7987-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B7987.12973712062647 (code B ref 7987); Thu, 10 Feb 2011 20:54:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 7987) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Feb 2011 20:53:26 +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 1PndW1-0000ge-Qq for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 15:53:26 -0500 Original-Received: from mail2.panix.com ([166.84.1.73]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PndVy-0000gQ-4V for 7987@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 15:53:23 -0500 Original-Received: from panix3.panix.com (panix3.panix.com [166.84.1.3]) by mail2.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6AEC38E4D; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:02:09 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: by panix3.panix.com (Postfix, from userid 834) id E229B8FDDE; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:02:09 -0500 (EST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 15:54:02 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:44027 Archived-At: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 02:50:42PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > Hmm. I guess you're right, although this behavior doesn't seem to be > > mentioned in the Manual. I'm using message-mode with Mutt, so there are > > no headers in the buffer. > > No headers at all? Where's the subject, then? In the headers that are not dumped to Emacs. The default configuration of Mutt has the headers edited through the Mutt interface, and only the body is sent to your $EDITOR. (You can override this, and edit the entire message, including headers, if desired, but my impression is that most people don't do this.) > > I'll experiment further and will update if necessary. Is there a > > preferred way to tell message-mode to assume that the buffer is a > > message body, rather than a header? > > Add a header. > > Maybe it would be be good to make message-mode accept an empty line as > a mail-header-separator (as does rfc822-goto-eoh). Well, I don't truly know how common this use-case is (though it's common enough that the EmacsWiki entry for Mutt and Emacs provides a workaround), but maybe it would also be good to be able to have message-mode accept the fact that you're editing a message body only? I personally don't use message-mode for the actual sending of messages, and in general I'd think that there could be reasons for wanting the editing and formatting features of message-mode without the sending features. Being able to say explicitly that you're editing the body would be, to my mind, a better solution than adding a fake header, or adding "(setq mail-header-separator "")" to one's .emacs, which feel like kludges for this issue. I'm not familiar with other text-based e-mail programs, but this is how most GUI or web-based mailers work too--the headers are off in one place, where they can be modified using one method, and the body is some textarea that is edited using some other variety of tools. Jesse Sheidlower