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 34B036DE176B for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 06:37:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.147 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.080, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.652, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 Bhy2Dv5G1Fkt for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 06:37:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com (mail-wm0-f51.google.com [74.125.82.51]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 269806DE01CA for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 06:37:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id n186so53503903wmn.1 for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 06:37:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dme-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=G/lpmI7SZ5s8WmrcG7Itf0Y9m0+71eJ6FGN3C9DClMw=; b=AyQFWYwaX9kINa+iHbfH1z0i/xQ20eOIqHkJluKYhWh4JQLCnftAqg9FXfcrlJaJTg 7m8Tmj5zhgxrCuAaGHPGn1oYJjd4N+3w3AhoK9L7H840DS7c8n+aT1lnBlqiyTabXYdh XzI7rqh6Al7TYp/B/3PNE/i85z92bTUzEyLC6P8m/EGKT+hb7T6dtkqsdl953b1BtWw1 UcqyU4fEh+Q1lG48aKQEsFIhblm9PMN1bT2qRADmJRia0WXBBfOmL5XvLFKxZ8JE/hyi lOuQI1k3vVectBqrkhGTmImHVZ3y/J+A28MXP7AYzM/sEcdCjaD8Yg5ABIhrlk7WYf73 H+qw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=G/lpmI7SZ5s8WmrcG7Itf0Y9m0+71eJ6FGN3C9DClMw=; b=H+L8fgXpMfiECXP8Lt+WSBanQjTVgmje+kJcVWQA6FSQ6JrNEceMP6WQGLQmSTj9BC UaajnvMoXaHrhT+hJmiNS8Xw4D/rCGAJqcL+ulcKXhwGiAxz0V5cSfyLkNSU5nq9aXAQ abp+Pq5z+UC9EN2ZHdyi93d0jVKWSjQ75fOgP6PeRewBbo4qCjQ6HFMUUakB2xxK/Yv2 33TbVXll25ptzZVDuUROqaV0ADchxZHLvNIS58KnEz4TDm0BKABXgEzKsSgW/a6HlJf9 Ik53YPT390ja7hTbkVR2LmRPMhx0weF9dwI3ofDIIG1icaB+roWiuoEj094Ba7Q5iVZ+ I7/A== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKerSpm987HPhMPWU8lQurh9iYtSgAoQh7wnYWFLIDjZXPYfWNrJ1J08cd4rzMlzA== X-Received: by 10.194.77.193 with SMTP id u1mr15114796wjw.73.1457793467148; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 06:37:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from disaster-area.hh.sledj.net ([2a01:348:1a2:1:ea39:35ff:fe2c:a227]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id av3sm13432639wjc.44.2016.03.12.06.37.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 12 Mar 2016 06:37:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (disaster-area.hh.sledj.net [local]) by disaster-area.hh.sledj.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id 09dcda85; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 14:37:44 +0000 (UTC) To: David Bremner , Tomi Ollila , Matthew Lear Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: (emacs) Parsing problems replying to encrypted html In-Reply-To: <87wpp76ctq.fsf@zancas.localnet> References: <56DD48B3.90604@bubblegen.co.uk> <87mvqatr6y.fsf@zancas.localnet> <87h9gigfyz.fsf@bubblegen.co.uk> <87pov58b9y.fsf@zancas.localnet> <87wpp76ctq.fsf@zancas.localnet> From: David Edmondson Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 14:37:44 +0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 14:37:52 -0000 On Sat, Mar 12 2016, David Bremner wrote: > Tomi Ollila writes: > >> 2016-03-08 (Tue) 14:16:01: reply --format=sexp --format-version=1 --reply-to=sender thread:0000000000004a6f >> 2016-03-08 (Tue) 14:16:01: show --format=raw --part=2 id:56DDE706.6060702@bubblegen.co.uk >> 2016-03-08 (Tue) 14:16:01: show --format=sexp --include-html --part=3 id:56DDE706.6060702@bubblegen.co.uk >> 2016-03-08 (Tue) 14:16:01: show --format=raw --part=3 id:56DDE706.6060702@bubblegen.co.uk >> > > I think the problem is in the following let form, which uses > notmuch-show-process-crypto. That isn't set in search mode. I'm unclear > on what the right solution is here; we could check > notmuch-crypto-process-mime, but I'm not sure how this would interact > with the handling of prefix arguments (for temporary toggling). Is "reply" from search mode a common pattern of use? Currently it seems generally un-useful (the thread has to contain just a single message - not just a single matching message). > (defun notmuch-mua-reply (query-string &optional sender reply-all) > (let ((args '("reply" "--format=sexp" "--format-version=1")) > (process-crypto notmuch-show-process-crypto) > reply > original)