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
next prev parent 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.