From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38E976DE01E0 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 11:00:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.058 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.058 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.057, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kWSZdEgJqeFu for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 11:00:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fethera.tethera.net (fethera.tethera.net [198.245.60.197]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB7176DE0134 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 11:00:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from remotemail by fethera.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iNhOx-0004EB-Ba; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 13:59:59 -0400 Received: (nullmailer pid 32242 invoked by uid 1000); Thu, 24 Oct 2019 17:59:58 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Ralph Seichter , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: Missing in 0.29.2 notmuch-dump.c: Fix output file being closed twice In-Reply-To: <87tv7ych5w.fsf@wedjat.horus-it.com> References: <87pnimewn5.fsf@wedjat.horus-it.com> <87pnimo13d.fsf@tethera.net> <87tv7ych5w.fsf@wedjat.horus-it.com> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:59:58 -0300 Message-ID: <87r232f2ht.fsf@tethera.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 18:00:04 -0000 Ralph Seichter writes: > * David Bremner: > >> That push was pushed to master, but not release. I guess at the time >> it didn't seem serious enough to warrant a point release? > > I did not expect a point release for that patch in particular. However, > given that the patch fixed a SIGABRT situation, I have assumed to see it > included in whatever release came next. Version 0.29.2 happens to be the > first release since the bugfix was accepted three months ago, hence my > moderate disappointment that the fix is missing. I understand your disappointment. I fully expected to have normal release before now, but life happens. d