--- /dev/null
+Return-Path: <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17467431FAE\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 9 Jun 2013 06:26:10 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -1.098\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+ tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,\r
+ NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+ by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+ with ESMTP id 4fU6j5XbIM6S for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+ Sun, 9 Jun 2013 06:26:02 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from mail2.qmul.ac.uk (mail2.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.6.6])\r
+ (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+ (No client certificate requested)\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3771B431FB6\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 9 Jun 2013 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from smtp.qmul.ac.uk ([138.37.6.40])\r
+ by mail2.qmul.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71)\r
+ (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)\r
+ id 1Ulfd6-0006Iu-Dc; Sun, 09 Jun 2013 14:25:58 +0100\r
+Received: from 93-97-24-31.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.24.31] helo=localhost)\r
+ by smtp.qmul.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71)\r
+ (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)\r
+ id 1Ulfd5-00079h-Tk; Sun, 09 Jun 2013 14:25:56 +0100\r
+From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>\r
+To: Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] man: document notmuch search --duplicate=N\r
+In-Reply-To: <87ehcbo1yf.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+References: <cover.1370775663.git.jani@nikula.org>\r
+ <e72d722da8706559142fcb3ea2626990b39192c5.1370775663.git.jani@nikula.org>\r
+ <87ehcbo1yf.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.15.2+171~ge2f30a2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1\r
+ (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2013 14:25:54 +0100\r
+Message-ID: <87bo7fo1p9.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
+X-Sender-Host-Address: 93.97.24.31\r
+X-QM-SPAM-Info: Sender has good ham record. :)\r
+X-QM-Body-MD5: 0e131666f761580328ed6425bc0b8b3c (of first 20000 bytes)\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Score: -0.0\r
+X-SpamAssassin-SpamBar: /\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Report: The QM spam filters have analysed this message to\r
+ determine if it is\r
+ spam. We require at least 5.0 points to mark a message as spam.\r
+ This message scored -0.0 points.\r
+ Summary of the scoring: \r
+ * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail\r
+ provider * (markwalters1009[at]gmail.com)\r
+ * -0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list\r
+X-QM-Scan-Virus: ClamAV says the message is clean\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+ <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2013 13:26:10 -0000\r
+\r
+\r
+Sorry about that: I meant to cancel the message rather than sending it.\r
+\r
+What I was wondering was whether we should change the wording of the\r
+manpage to make it clear that notmuch search --output=files returns all\r
+filenames where any of the copies matches the search terms (I think; I\r
+was going to check before sending anything). In particular, \r
+\r
+notmuch search --output=files folder:a_folder may return filenames not\r
+in a_folder\r
+\r
+(This is slightly more noticeable with this patch than before as \r
+notmuch search --output=files --duplicate=1 folder:a_folder could give\r
+no results in folder a_folder\r
+\r
+(None of the above is meant to be a criticism of this patch: I have\r
+only sent this email due to my accidental sending of the previous message)\r
+\r
+Best wishes\r
+\r
+Mark\r
+\r
+\r
+\r
+\r
+What IOn Sun, 09 Jun 2013, Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com> wrote:\r
+> One thing that slightly bothers me with this set (which in some sense is\r
+> already true) is doing a search of the form\r
+>\r
+> notmuch search --output=files folder:<a_folder>\r
+>\r
+> T\r
+>\r
+> On Sun, 09 Jun 2013, Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org> wrote:\r
+>> ---\r
+>> man/man1/notmuch-search.1 | 11 +++++++++++\r
+>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)\r
+>>\r
+>> diff --git a/man/man1/notmuch-search.1 b/man/man1/notmuch-search.1\r
+>> index 1c1e049..4d8b3d3 100644\r
+>> --- a/man/man1/notmuch-search.1\r
+>> +++ b/man/man1/notmuch-search.1\r
+>> @@ -158,6 +158,17 @@ but the "match count" is the number of matching non-excluded messages in the\r
+>> thread, rather than the number of matching messages.\r
+>> .RE\r
+>> \r
+>> +.RS 4\r
+>> +.TP 4\r
+>> +.BR \-\-duplicate=N\r
+>> +\r
+>> +Effective with\r
+>> +.BR --output=files ,\r
+>> +output the Nth filename associated with each message matching the\r
+>> +query (N is 1-based). If N is greater than the number of files\r
+>> +associated with the message, don't print anything.\r
+>> +.RE\r
+>> +\r
+>> .SH EXIT STATUS\r
+>> \r
+>> This command supports the following special exit status codes\r
+>> -- \r
+>> 1.7.10.4\r
+>>\r
+>> _______________________________________________\r
+>> notmuch mailing list\r
+>> notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+>> http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch\r
projects / notmuch-archives.git / commitdiff