all messages for Emacs-related lists mirrored at yhetil.org
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Mark Lillibridge <mark.lillibridge@hp.com>
To: martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>
Cc: 9831@debbugs.gnu.org, jpff@codemist.co.uk
Subject: bug#9831: cause of bug found!  [PATCH]
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:53:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <qmhaa8nw3eh.fsf@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4EA5308F.2050608@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:31:59 +0200)


>   >     Sorry, more background.  The bug OP and I am reporting is as
>   > follows: we have two Rmail buffers, say A and B, each with summary
>   > buffers.  However, only A and it's summary are displayed in windows.  We
>   > then output the current message from A to B via 'o'.  The bug is that at
>   > this point the summary for B becomes displayed when it should not.
>  
>  I'm probably too silly to understand.  John was talking about "o" not
>  doing the right thing, but IIUC "o" calls `rmail-output' and not
>  `rmail-summary-output' in his case.  At least that's what I deduct from
>  his "When reading mail o writes the message to another file, or buffer
>  if it is loaded" and the doc-string of `rmail-output' saying "Append
>  this message to mail file FILE-NAME".  Then John says that "It also
>  changes to that buffer and this seriously interferes with work flow, as
>  it is inconsistent with when the file is not in a buffer" but
>  unfortunately I don't understand what "changes to that buffer" means in
>  this context.

    Yes, 'o' calls rmail-output from an Rmail buffer and
rmail-summary-output from the associated summary buffer.  Both suffer
from the bug we are talking about.

    What John means by "changes to that buffer" is that his window
showing rmail-buffer A changes to a *different* rmail-buffer, namely the
one he was outputting the message to.  Note that this buffer change does
not occur when the targeted rmail file is not held in a buffer, hence
John's comments about inconsistency.



>   > but because of the bug if this summary was produced by rmail-summary, it
>   > will be displayed.
>   >
>   >     Why? rmail-update-summary makes a saved function call (depending on
>   > the filtering requested, a different call is necessary to rebuild the
>   > summary) to update the summary.  If the summary was originally created via
>   > rmail-summary, then the saved call is (rmail-summary), which because of
>   > the bug displays the summary.
>   >
>   >     Why?  Because someone incorrectly added code to display the summary
>   > buffer on summary update to rmail-summary.
>  
>  According to our Logs `rmail-update-summary' hasn't been changed for
>  many years.

    I never said that function got changed; remember that it is an
indirection function.  One of the functions it can call, namely
rmail-summary, has been changed since Rmail 22.  I don't have convenient
access to the source control system so I can't tell you when that change
was made.


>  I still suppose your's is a different bug.  But I suspect that any of
>  these bugs may have its cause in a recent change of the buffer display
>  routines.  Unfortunately, I'm not of much help here since I don't use
>  rmail.

    Let's ask John if my patch makes his bug go away.  It certainly
makes mine go way.

- Mark





  reply	other threads:[~2011-10-27  2:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-10-22 11:08 bug#9831: 24.0.90; o and c-o in RMAIL change buffer john ffitch
2011-10-22 20:06 ` bug#9831: narrowing the bug down Mark Lillibridge
2011-10-22 20:45   ` Mark Lillibridge
2011-10-22 21:26     ` bug#9831: cause of bug found! [PATCH] Mark Lillibridge
2011-10-23  9:19       ` martin rudalics
2011-10-23 20:21         ` Mark Lillibridge
2011-10-24  9:31           ` martin rudalics
2011-10-27  2:53             ` Mark Lillibridge [this message]
2011-10-27  9:52               ` martin rudalics
2011-10-27  3:09 ` bug#9831: Your bug report re: o and c-o in RMAIL change buffer Mark Lillibridge
2011-11-14  9:32   ` bug#9831: " Glenn Morris

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=qmhaa8nw3eh.fsf@hp.com \
    --to=mark.lillibridge@hp.com \
    --cc=9831@debbugs.gnu.org \
    --cc=jpff@codemist.co.uk \
    --cc=rudalics@gmx.at \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.