* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it @ 2009-01-24 14:24 ` Eli Zaretskii 2009-01-25 0:12 ` Glenn Morris ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-24 14:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-pretest-bug Please write in English if possible, because the Emacs maintainers usually do not have translators to read other languages for them. Your bug report will be posted to the emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org mailing list. Please describe exactly what actions triggered the bug and the precise symptoms of the bug: To reproduce: emacs -Q C-u M-x rmail FOO RET C-u g FOO.2 RET The last command automatically saves the Rmail inbox (as it should), but the buffer is nevertheless marked modified after the save. If Emacs crashed, and you have the Emacs process in the gdb debugger, please include the output from the following gdb commands: `bt full' and `xbacktrace'. If you would like to further debug the crash, please read the file d:/gnu/emacs/etc/DEBUG for instructions. In GNU Emacs 23.0.60.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600) of 2009-01-24 on HOME-C4E4A596F7 Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600 configured using `configure --with-gcc (3.4)' Important settings: value of $LC_ALL: nil value of $LC_COLLATE: nil value of $LC_CTYPE: nil value of $LC_MESSAGES: nil value of $LC_MONETARY: nil value of $LC_NUMERIC: nil value of $LC_TIME: nil value of $LANG: ENU value of $XMODIFIERS: nil locale-coding-system: cp1255 default-enable-multibyte-characters: t Major mode: RMAIL Minor modes in effect: tooltip-mode: t tool-bar-mode: t mouse-wheel-mode: t menu-bar-mode: t file-name-shadow-mode: t global-font-lock-mode: t font-lock-mode: t blink-cursor-mode: t global-auto-composition-mode: t auto-composition-mode: t auto-encryption-mode: t auto-compression-mode: t line-number-mode: t transient-mark-mode: t Recent input: C-u M-x r m a i l <return> ~ / d a <tab> m a i l . i n <return> p p p n n n n C-u g <up> 2 <return> C-x b * M e s s <tab> <return> C-x b <return> M-x r e p o r t <tab> <return> Recent messages: Loading vc-cvs...done Counting messages...done No following nondeleted message Getting mail from d:/usr/eli/data/mail.in2... Counting new messages... Counting messages...20 Counting new messages...done (37) Saving file d:/usr/eli/data/mail.in... Wrote d:/usr/eli/data/mail.in 37 new messages read ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-24 14:24 ` bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-25 0:12 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-25 4:22 ` Eli Zaretskii 2009-01-25 1:53 ` Richard M Stallman 2009-03-06 3:55 ` bug#2022: marked as done (23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it) Emacs bug Tracking System 2 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 0:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 2022 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > emacs -Q > C-u M-x rmail FOO RET > C-u g FOO.2 RET > > The last command automatically saves the Rmail inbox (as it should), Yes, and at this point (after the new mail has been inserted) the buffer is (correctly) marked unmodified. > but the buffer is nevertheless marked modified after the save. But immediately after this, rmail-set-attribute is called to remove the "unseen" attribute from the first new mail inserted from FOO.2. This (correctly) marks the buffer as modified. If the mails in FOO.2 have already been seen, no buffer modification occurs. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 0:12 ` Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 4:22 ` Eli Zaretskii 2009-01-25 5:57 ` Glenn Morris 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-25 4:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: 2022 > From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> > Cc: 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com > Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 19:12:15 -0500 > > But immediately after this, rmail-set-attribute is called to remove > the "unseen" attribute from the first new mail inserted from FOO.2. > This (correctly) marks the buffer as modified. Emacs does not elsewhere consider seeing a file as its modification. Why should Rmail be different? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 4:22 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-25 5:57 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-25 18:59 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 5:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 2022 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Emacs does not elsewhere consider seeing a file as its modification. > Why should Rmail be different? Because seeing a file (for the first time) modifies the X-RMAIL-ATTRIBUTES: header, which is stored in the file. I guess that if you just use rmail to visit a folder which has an unseen mail, it will be marked modified in exactly the same way. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 5:57 ` Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 18:59 ` Eli Zaretskii 2009-01-25 20:45 ` Glenn Morris 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-25 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: 2022 > From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> > Cc: 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com > Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 00:57:04 -0500 > > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Emacs does not elsewhere consider seeing a file as its modification. > > Why should Rmail be different? > > Because seeing a file (for the first time) modifies the > X-RMAIL-ATTRIBUTES: header, which is stored in the file. The old (pre-mbox) Rmail also had the unseen attribute, but it never marked the Rmail buffer modified when it was removed. So this is a change in behavior, and I can't say I like it. I don't think we want to regard seeing a message as a modification, since the body of the message does not change a bit. But if we do make this change, at the very least, it should have been implemented as an option, and/or via an idle timer, so that just paging thru many messages does not automatically mark them as ``seen'', although no human could possibly ``see'' a message in a fraction of a second. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 18:59 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-25 20:45 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-25 21:03 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 20:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 2022 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > The old (pre-mbox) Rmail also had the unseen attribute, but it never > marked the Rmail buffer modified when it was removed. That's a good argument. I wonder how it worked... > I don't think we want to regard seeing a message as a modification, > since the body of the message does not change a bit. But the meta-data (or whatever you want to call it) has changed. If Emacs were to crash without saving at that point, you would lose some data, namely the data that you had viewed a particular mail. It seems pretty reasonable to me. It's what VM does, for example. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 20:45 ` Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 21:03 ` Eli Zaretskii 2009-01-26 1:53 ` Glenn Morris 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-25 21:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: 2022 > From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> > Cc: 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com > Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 15:45:59 -0500 > > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > The old (pre-mbox) Rmail also had the unseen attribute, but it never > > marked the Rmail buffer modified when it was removed. > > That's a good argument. I wonder how it worked... By setting the buffer's modified flag, like it's done everywhere else. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 21:03 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-26 1:53 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-29 22:06 ` Glenn Morris 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-26 1:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 2022 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > By setting the buffer's modified flag, like it's done everywhere else. Actually, it seems rmail-mode-1 used to lie to you by doing: (setq mode-line-modified "--") Seems like a bad idea to me... Anyway, (add-hook 'rmail-mode-hook (lambda () (setq mode-line-modified "--"))) and you're back to having the wool pulled over your eyes. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-26 1:53 ` Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-29 22:06 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-30 9:29 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-29 22:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 2022 I'd propose to tag this "wontfix", unless there are objections? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-29 22:06 ` Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-30 9:29 ` Eli Zaretskii 2009-01-30 17:38 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-30 23:05 ` Richard M Stallman 0 siblings, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-30 9:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: 2022 > From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> > Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> > Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 17:06:15 -0500 > > > I'd propose to tag this "wontfix", unless there are objections? Objection! I would like Rmail to keep the previous behavior, whereby it sets up the mode line to not show the modified status. There's no real reason to change that behavior; I'm not aware of any request for such a feature. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-30 9:29 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-30 17:38 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-30 23:05 ` Richard M Stallman 1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-30 17:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 2022 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I would like Rmail to keep the previous behavior, whereby it sets up > the mode line to not show the modified status. There's no real reason > to change that behavior; I'm not aware of any request for such a > feature. Fair enough. I'm not an rmail user, so my opinion is not worth much. (But the old behaviour seems like a bug to me, rather than a feature.) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-30 9:29 ` Eli Zaretskii 2009-01-30 17:38 ` Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-30 23:05 ` Richard M Stallman 2009-01-31 4:17 ` Kevin Rodgers 2009-01-31 8:25 ` Eli Zaretskii 1 sibling, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Richard M Stallman @ 2009-01-30 23:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii, 2022; +Cc: bug-gnu-emacs, bug-submit-list, 2022, owner I would like Rmail to keep the previous behavior, whereby it sets up the mode line to not show the modified status. I changed that a long time ago, because I discovered I did want to know whether the buffer is modified. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-30 23:05 ` Richard M Stallman @ 2009-01-31 4:17 ` Kevin Rodgers 2009-01-31 8:25 ` Eli Zaretskii 1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Kevin Rodgers @ 2009-01-31 4:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bug-gnu-emacs Richard M Stallman wrote: > I would like Rmail to keep the previous behavior, whereby it sets up > the mode line to not show the modified status. > > I changed that a long time ago, because I discovered I did want to > know whether the buffer is modified. And the truth shall set you free. -- Kevin Rodgers Denver, Colorado, USA ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-30 23:05 ` Richard M Stallman 2009-01-31 4:17 ` Kevin Rodgers @ 2009-01-31 8:25 ` Eli Zaretskii 1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-31 8:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: rms; +Cc: 2022 > From: Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> > CC: rgm@gnu.org, bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com, > 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, > owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com > Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 18:05:24 -0500 > > I would like Rmail to keep the previous behavior, whereby it sets up > the mode line to not show the modified status. > > I changed that a long time ago, because I discovered I did want to > know whether the buffer is modified. Well, at least this change in behavior should be in NEWS. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-24 14:24 ` bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it Eli Zaretskii 2009-01-25 0:12 ` Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 1:53 ` Richard M Stallman 2009-01-25 3:10 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-25 4:20 ` Eli Zaretskii 2009-03-06 3:55 ` bug#2022: marked as done (23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it) Emacs bug Tracking System 2 siblings, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Richard M Stallman @ 2009-01-25 1:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii, 2022; +Cc: emacs-pretest-bug, bug-gnu-emacs, bug-submit-list emacs -Q C-u M-x rmail FOO RET C-u g FOO.2 RET The last command automatically saves the Rmail inbox (as it should), but the buffer is nevertheless marked modified after the save. Maybe it is deleting the "unseen" attribute when it shows one of the newly insertes message. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 1:53 ` Richard M Stallman @ 2009-01-25 3:10 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-25 4:19 ` Eli Zaretskii 2009-01-26 4:22 ` Richard M Stallman 2009-01-25 4:20 ` Eli Zaretskii 1 sibling, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 3:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: rms; +Cc: 2022 OT: You replied to a mail that looked like this: From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> To: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Your reply was addressed to: To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com Where are all these extra addresses coming from? I can understand you having emacs-pretest-bug there (even though it's unnecessary); but not bug-gnu-emacs and bug-submit-list as well. I don't think that last one is even a valid address. All this does is create duplicate mails (I got three copies of your mail). Can you check your mail setup please? (All you need is eliz and 2022). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 3:10 ` Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 4:19 ` Eli Zaretskii 2009-01-25 5:54 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-26 4:22 ` Richard M Stallman 1 sibling, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-25 4:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Glenn Morris, 2022; +Cc: rms > From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> > Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 22:10:22 -0500 > Cc: 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com > > > OT: > > You replied to a mail that looked like this: > > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> > To: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org > Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com > > Your reply was addressed to: > > To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com > Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, > bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com > > Where are all these extra addresses coming from? Like me, Richard uses Rmail. So I'm guessing he just pressed `r', which replies to all the addresses in From:, To:, CC:, and Reply-To:, which are not himself. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 4:19 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-25 5:54 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-25 5:59 ` Glenn Morris 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 5:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 2022, rms Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Like me, Richard uses Rmail. So I'm guessing he just pressed `r', > which replies to all the addresses in From:, To:, CC:, and Reply-To:, > which are not himself. Whence bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com then? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 5:54 ` Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 5:59 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-25 18:35 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 5:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii, 2022, Richard Stallman Glenn Morris wrote (on Sun, 25 Jan 2009 at 00:54 -0500): > Whence bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com then? Oh, I see, it's the Resent-To address. So this is bug#512. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 5:59 ` Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 18:35 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-25 18:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: 2022, rms > Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 00:59:33 -0500 > From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> > > > Glenn Morris wrote (on Sun, 25 Jan 2009 at 00:54 -0500): > > > Whence bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com then? > > Oh, I see, it's the Resent-To address. Yes, and bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org comes from Resent-CC. What about that one? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 3:10 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-25 4:19 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-26 4:22 ` Richard M Stallman 2009-01-26 7:25 ` Glenn Morris 1 sibling, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Richard M Stallman @ 2009-01-26 4:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: 2022 You replied to a mail that looked like this: From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> To: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Your reply was addressed to: To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com They were in the message I replied to. Rmail's reply command puts them in automatically. Sometimes I remember to delete them, sometimes I forget. Here's what I get in *mail*: To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com CC: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org The inclusion of those other addresses is certainly undesirable, but given these headers, is Rmail doing something wrong? X-Loop: owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> Resent-To: bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com Resent-CC: Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 14:30:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: <handler.2022.B.12328070836588@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com> Resent-Sender: owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com X-Emacs-PR-Message: report 2022 X-Emacs-PR-Package: emacs X-Emacs-PR-Keywords: Received: via spool by submit@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com id=B.12328070836588 (code B ref -1); Sat, 24 Jan 2009 14:30:02 +0000 Received: (at submit) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 24 Jan 2009 14:24:43 +0000 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (fencepost.gnu.org [140.186.70.10]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id n0OEOexo006582 for <submit@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 06:24:41 -0800 Received: from mail.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166]:56049 helo=mx10.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1LQjPd-0001dc-Nx for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 09:23:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1LQjR7-0001aw-SY for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 09:24:39 -0500 Received: from mtaout1.012.net.il ([84.95.2.1]:20972) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1LQjR7-0001a9-1k for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 09:24:37 -0500 Received: from conversion-daemon.i-mtaout1.012.net.il by i-mtaout1.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KDZ00K00C06ZU00@i-mtaout1.012.net.il> for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 16:24:51 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.6.113]) by i-mtaout1.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KDZ00J4PC1EX160@i-mtaout1.012.net.il> for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2009 16:24:51 +0200 (IST) Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 16:24:37 +0200 From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org Message-id: <ueiysu6hm.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 9.1 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 09:43:33 -0500 Cc: Subject: bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 2022@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnu-emacs>, <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/bug-gnu-emacs> List-Post: <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnu-emacs>, <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+rms=gnu.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+rms=gnu.org@gnu.org X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-26 4:22 ` Richard M Stallman @ 2009-01-26 7:25 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-26 21:32 ` Stefan Monnier 2009-01-27 6:11 ` Richard M Stallman 0 siblings, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-26 7:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: rms; +Cc: 2022 Richard M Stallman wrote: > The inclusion of those other addresses is certainly undesirable, > but given these headers, is Rmail doing something wrong? Rmail was including the Resent-To and Resent-CC addresses in the reply. It was established on emacs-devel in June 2008 that this is incorrect according to RFC 2822 (filed as bug#512). I believe I have just fixed this in rmail-reply. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-26 7:25 ` Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-26 21:32 ` Stefan Monnier 2009-01-27 6:11 ` Richard M Stallman 1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Stefan Monnier @ 2009-01-26 21:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: 2022, rms >> The inclusion of those other addresses is certainly undesirable, >> but given these headers, is Rmail doing something wrong? > Rmail was including the Resent-To and Resent-CC addresses in the > reply. It was established on emacs-devel in June 2008 that this is > incorrect according to RFC 2822 (filed as bug#512). I believe I have > just fixed this in rmail-reply. Thank you, Stefan PS: The rest still needs to be fixed on the debbugs side. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-26 7:25 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-26 21:32 ` Stefan Monnier @ 2009-01-27 6:11 ` Richard M Stallman 2009-01-27 7:51 ` Glenn Morris 1 sibling, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Richard M Stallman @ 2009-01-27 6:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Glenn Morris, 2022; +Cc: bug-gnu-emacs, bug-submit-list, 2022, owner Rmail was including the Resent-To and Resent-CC addresses in the reply. It was established on emacs-devel in June 2008 that this is incorrect according to RFC 2822 (filed as bug#512). This conclusion seems really strange. If you received a message that was resent to you and others, shouldn't they be in the CC for your response? I searched my mail from June for bug.512 and got no matches. Can you send me whatever message stated the reasons for this conclusion? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-27 6:11 ` Richard M Stallman @ 2009-01-27 7:51 ` Glenn Morris 0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-27 7:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: rms; +Cc: 2022 Richard M Stallman wrote: > This conclusion seems really strange. If you received a message that > was resent to you and others, shouldn't they be in the CC for your response? > > I searched my mail from June for bug.512 and got no matches. > Can you send me whatever message stated the reasons for this conclusion? For the record, this discussion has moved to emacs-devel. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it 2009-01-25 1:53 ` Richard M Stallman 2009-01-25 3:10 ` Glenn Morris @ 2009-01-25 4:20 ` Eli Zaretskii 1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2009-01-25 4:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: rms; +Cc: 2022 > From: Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> > CC: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com, > bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:53:23 -0500 > > emacs -Q > C-u M-x rmail FOO RET > C-u g FOO.2 RET > > The last command automatically saves the Rmail inbox (as it should), > but the buffer is nevertheless marked modified after the save. > > Maybe it is deleting the "unseen" attribute when it shows one of the > newly insertes message. That's what Glenn found out, yes. But I don't think I, as a user, care about that attribute: if the buffer was just saved, it is not modified from the user perspective. I find the fact that it is shown as modified confusing. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* bug#2022: marked as done (23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it) 2009-01-24 14:24 ` bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it Eli Zaretskii 2009-01-25 0:12 ` Glenn Morris 2009-01-25 1:53 ` Richard M Stallman @ 2009-03-06 3:55 ` Emacs bug Tracking System 2 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Emacs bug Tracking System @ 2009-03-06 3:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Glenn Morris [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 908 bytes --] Your message dated Thu, 05 Mar 2009 22:49:32 -0500 with message-id <d47i33tinn.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> and subject line Re: bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it has caused the Emacs bug report #2022, regarding 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com immediately.) -- 2022: http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=2022 Emacs Bug Tracking System Contact owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com with problems [-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 4252 bytes --] From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> To: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org Subject: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 16:24:37 +0200 Message-ID: <ueiysu6hm.fsf@gnu.org> Please write in English if possible, because the Emacs maintainers usually do not have translators to read other languages for them. Your bug report will be posted to the emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org mailing list. Please describe exactly what actions triggered the bug and the precise symptoms of the bug: To reproduce: emacs -Q C-u M-x rmail FOO RET C-u g FOO.2 RET The last command automatically saves the Rmail inbox (as it should), but the buffer is nevertheless marked modified after the save. If Emacs crashed, and you have the Emacs process in the gdb debugger, please include the output from the following gdb commands: `bt full' and `xbacktrace'. If you would like to further debug the crash, please read the file d:/gnu/emacs/etc/DEBUG for instructions. In GNU Emacs 23.0.60.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600) of 2009-01-24 on HOME-C4E4A596F7 Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600 configured using `configure --with-gcc (3.4)' Important settings: value of $LC_ALL: nil value of $LC_COLLATE: nil value of $LC_CTYPE: nil value of $LC_MESSAGES: nil value of $LC_MONETARY: nil value of $LC_NUMERIC: nil value of $LC_TIME: nil value of $LANG: ENU value of $XMODIFIERS: nil locale-coding-system: cp1255 default-enable-multibyte-characters: t Major mode: RMAIL Minor modes in effect: tooltip-mode: t tool-bar-mode: t mouse-wheel-mode: t menu-bar-mode: t file-name-shadow-mode: t global-font-lock-mode: t font-lock-mode: t blink-cursor-mode: t global-auto-composition-mode: t auto-composition-mode: t auto-encryption-mode: t auto-compression-mode: t line-number-mode: t transient-mark-mode: t Recent input: C-u M-x r m a i l <return> ~ / d a <tab> m a i l . i n <return> p p p n n n n C-u g <up> 2 <return> C-x b * M e s s <tab> <return> C-x b <return> M-x r e p o r t <tab> <return> Recent messages: Loading vc-cvs...done Counting messages...done No following nondeleted message Getting mail from d:/usr/eli/data/mail.in2... Counting new messages... Counting messages...20 Counting new messages...done (37) Saving file d:/usr/eli/data/mail.in... Wrote d:/usr/eli/data/mail.in 37 new messages read [-- Attachment #3: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 1675 bytes --] From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> To: 2022-done@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Subject: Re: bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 22:49:32 -0500 Message-ID: <d47i33tinn.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Well, at least this change in behavior should be in NEWS. ok, done ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-03-06 3:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <d47i33tinn.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org>
2009-01-24 14:24 ` bug#2022: 23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it Eli Zaretskii
2009-01-25 0:12 ` Glenn Morris
2009-01-25 4:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-01-25 5:57 ` Glenn Morris
2009-01-25 18:59 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-01-25 20:45 ` Glenn Morris
2009-01-25 21:03 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-01-26 1:53 ` Glenn Morris
2009-01-29 22:06 ` Glenn Morris
2009-01-30 9:29 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-01-30 17:38 ` Glenn Morris
2009-01-30 23:05 ` Richard M Stallman
2009-01-31 4:17 ` Kevin Rodgers
2009-01-31 8:25 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-01-25 1:53 ` Richard M Stallman
2009-01-25 3:10 ` Glenn Morris
2009-01-25 4:19 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-01-25 5:54 ` Glenn Morris
2009-01-25 5:59 ` Glenn Morris
2009-01-25 18:35 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-01-26 4:22 ` Richard M Stallman
2009-01-26 7:25 ` Glenn Morris
2009-01-26 21:32 ` Stefan Monnier
2009-01-27 6:11 ` Richard M Stallman
2009-01-27 7:51 ` Glenn Morris
2009-01-25 4:20 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-03-06 3:55 ` bug#2022: marked as done (23.0.60; Rmail buffer marked modified after saving it) Emacs bug Tracking System
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.