From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bastien Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: merging pmail Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 01:00:04 +0100 Message-ID: <87pribhr7f.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87y6x4ue2u.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> <3lsknbtdk9.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <77vds7yumx.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87ocxyxq42.fsf@gnu.org> <2wy6x1vrjy.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1232928040 28626 80.91.229.12 (26 Jan 2009 00:00:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 00:00:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Chong Yidong , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 26 01:01:53 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LREvB-0008DH-MD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 01:01:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58574 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LREtu-000764-2r for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:00:26 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LREtp-00074r-8O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:00:21 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LREtn-00073i-Ki for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:00:20 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52641 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LREtn-00073N-Fx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:00:19 -0500 Original-Received: from ik-out-1112.google.com ([66.249.90.181]:63989) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LREtl-00005s-JV; Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:00:17 -0500 Original-Received: by ik-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id c30so908922ika.2 for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2009 16:00:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:from:to:cc:subject :in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; bh=cEGScO1Mp+NHGvm7KNhTVJRojws5pmZV9CDaqChycEM=; b=SLoD6zFzAM3pzkMBG10Ty1Ziebje39TxxQ5iqIa232Z3w5cqnADE5yvUZPUfKqawPI wUq2jQfbTpLO+1NAZVTli8VNix2vY1+0d5jPVmO9zjd3x/a60KevYvtoe0KXCtprtkgW AFURRvlcTLpdHhedPdZGmpDu4z0etgZpzYmO4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date :message-id:mime-version:content-type; b=ROmjRQI7/aYFeRnaITRH0VfpxyTvMQQsYLYZX0zEgPVXd/OZVn2GrrmOyOGKvNv3M6 J528DlXNgsZ3DoYz5NU1yljjzMutKL72ay1UUJaayilaN29R0FwVwWbztTVIlWXzcdOs VU5nZN5hRopFbQHwab84z6p9t9hox6fI3MeEQ= Original-Received: by 10.210.34.5 with SMTP id h5mr3003607ebh.161.1232928014163; Sun, 25 Jan 2009 16:00:14 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from bzg ([82.98.22.134]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g9sm6015142gvc.16.2009.01.25.16.00.11 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 25 Jan 2009 16:00:13 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by bzg (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B05B0162235; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 01:00:04 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <2wy6x1vrjy.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (Glenn Morris's message of "Fri, 23 Jan 2009 12:52:01 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:108242 Archived-At: Glenn Morris writes: >> I checked org-rmail.el which works fine. > > ? It uses rmail-narrow-to-non-pruned-header, a function which doesn't > exist any more. > > I'm also at present unsure if rmail-show-message behaves differently > now, and if rmail-show-message-maybe has taken over the old behaviour. Tests worked fine, but I will look closer into the code, thanks. -- Bastien