From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#21182: 25.0.50; gnus: every other unread message is marked as read on each nnimap group refresh Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2016 16:57:22 +1100 Message-ID: <87h9hlawql.fsf@gnus.org> References: <877fpc8r1s.fsf@esperi.org.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1454824705 19296 80.91.229.3 (7 Feb 2016 05:58:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2016 05:58:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 21182@debbugs.gnu.org To: Nick Alcock Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 07 06:58:14 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aSIMN-00044S-Tg for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 06:58:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59886 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSIMN-0004UM-9v for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 00:58:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45546) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSIMJ-0004Tx-9K for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 00:58:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSIME-0001Ln-O0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 00:58:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:55981) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSIME-0001Lj-KN for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 00:58:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSIME-0000q2-Fe; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 00:58:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, bugs@gnus.org Resent-Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2016 05:58:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 21182 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs,gnus X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 21182-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B21182.14548246743197 (code B ref 21182); Sun, 07 Feb 2016 05:58:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 21182) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2016 05:57:54 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36334 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSIM6-0000pV-55 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 00:57:54 -0500 Original-Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]:46053) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSIM4-0000pM-10 for 21182@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 00:57:52 -0500 Original-Received: from cpe-60-225-211-161.nsw.bigpond.net.au ([60.225.211.161] helo=mouse) by hermes.netfonds.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1aSILf-0005hs-Tr; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 06:57:28 +0100 In-Reply-To: <877fpc8r1s.fsf@esperi.org.uk> (Nick Alcock's message of "Mon, 03 Aug 2015 14:01:03 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.90 (gnu/linux) X-MailScanner-ID: 1aSILf-0005hs-Tr MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1455429450.3895@DbEUAlydr4bbyNGPfV8AtA 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:112604 Archived-At: Nick Alcock writes: > This happened after my first Emacs update for nearly a year (a bit of a > 'big bang'), so it could have come from almost any change to nnimap > since September last year. I'll do a bisection and hunt for it. (It's > not like I can do any more damage to my imap read marks than I already > have! I wanted to get to 'inbox zero', but not this way...) Are you still seeing this problem? -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no