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 77C256DE0350 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 2017 01:08:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.484 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.484 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.168, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.652] 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 OSDwMWBn_4ze for ; Thu, 30 Nov 2017 01:08:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from guru.guru-group.fi (guru.guru-group.fi [46.183.73.34]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D96D6DE0191 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 2017 01:08:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from guru.guru-group.fi (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by guru.guru-group.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 978F11000E3; Thu, 30 Nov 2017 11:08:05 +0200 (EET) From: Tomi Ollila To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor , Notmuch Mail Subject: Re: [PATCH] cli/help: give a hint about notmuch-emacs-mua In-Reply-To: <87k1y85mza.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> References: <20171026212751.4459-1-dkg@fifthhorseman.net> <87k1y85mza.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.25+89~g5a0c015 (https://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/25.2.1 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Face: HhBM'cA~ MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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, 30 Nov 2017 09:08:17 -0000 On Thu, Nov 30 2017, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On Thu 2017-10-26 18:27:51 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> "notmuch help" doesn't mention "notmuch-emacs-mua" even though we >> support it through the try_external_command() mechanism. >> >> In addition, "notmuch help emacs-mua" doesn't work, even though we >> ship the appropriate manpage. >> >> This changeset fixes both of these problems. > > Ping! i don't think this patch is complex or objectionable. Can it be > merged? it may (*) look like we don't have #if WITH_EMACS (**) cpp macros defined ??? Tomi (*) did not check... (**) this is emacs-specific stull, less generic that other hints (if that matters) ... Sorry to cause confusion... > > --dkg