From: Mark Walters Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 16:19:01 +0000 (+0100) Subject: Re: [Raúl Benencia] Bug#789693: notmuch-emacs: notmuch-tree does not mark messages... X-Git-Url: http://git.tremily.us/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=177617767033ccc328d8595b51575d8a5d8d5eb7;p=notmuch-archives.git Re: [Raúl Benencia] Bug#789693: notmuch-emacs: notmuch-tree does not mark messages as read --- diff --git a/74/1669aa09474807d95cb1be0256a2e1f6f33fed b/74/1669aa09474807d95cb1be0256a2e1f6f33fed new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e381e025b --- /dev/null +++ b/74/1669aa09474807d95cb1be0256a2e1f6f33fed @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +Return-Path: +X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D4D96DE02B1 + for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2015 09:20:37 -0700 (PDT) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: 0.715 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.715 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.285, + DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, + FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, + FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, + RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, 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 jDmQQ1M3Qmf9 for ; + Tue, 23 Jun 2015 09:20:36 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com (mail-wi0-f181.google.com + [209.85.212.181]) + by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2E176DE1B48 + for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2015 09:19:05 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by wicgi11 with SMTP id gi11so21888963wic.0 + for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2015 09:19:03 -0700 (PDT) +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; + h=from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:message-id + :mime-version:content-type; + bh=448VD6vbqyxFTPDeXdCDFRqBr8r+Zanagq+k8DarHUM=; + b=FK2eBoJMkrMdVZtd6iO9rModejQeooRcSkTS/9pkWZEreZ05cM4KpuN597InORrXrH + 3EJj66Z/iNpzxfOMyTv60KfIcNFKu+gOkYS5rMXWq6LQIC7e4WGAfAX2aYPkcS7sLbp/ + 9NXbj+0AUXMOsPvsKC6yx+vKPfNJD8Cm5pWcyxp50MOxtAOswkRKnulnKuNb9HsIXgEj + Xmrjb4bYpczu0WgXu5hOTjHe8oyUmx+QZ3CV5Gha+LFTPwhTg4bNv4a7hidx2KrcalkU + lNRnguFyTZlIVvDBXtywd99no7hHHGs+qrMNkfAXImj9DnbgeSmXwxOwUDNY3vArOhfA + 8WGg== +X-Received: by 10.194.121.163 with SMTP id ll3mr50956353wjb.142.1435076343619; + Tue, 23 Jun 2015 09:19:03 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from localhost (5751dfa2.skybroadband.com. [87.81.223.162]) + by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id a6sm3412244wjy.33.2015.06.23.09.19.02 + (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); + Tue, 23 Jun 2015 09:19:02 -0700 (PDT) +From: Mark Walters +To: David Bremner , notmuch +Subject: Re: =?utf-8?Q?=5BRa=C3=BAl?= Benencia] Bug#789693: notmuch-emacs: + notmuch-tree does not mark messages as read +In-Reply-To: <87616ewk86.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> +References: <87616ewk86.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> +User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.1+86~gef5e66a (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1 + (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) +Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 17:19:01 +0100 +Message-ID: <87pp4mwg7e.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 +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: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 16:20:37 -0000 + + +Hi + +> This seems to be true for me also. Strange that I never noticed before. +> Am I right in thinking that patch +> +> id:1433843467-32398-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com +> +> is directed to fix this? + +Yes that is correct. What happened is that the tree code relied on the +message-pane (a show buffer) to mark the message read, but updated its +own display. After the unread handling changes the show buffer only marks a +message read if it is the active buffer (so its post-command hook gets +called), so it no longer removes the unread tag. + +Best wishes + +Mark + +(PS this message shows the deficiencies in our emacs reply handling: it +doesn't include the rfc822 part!) + + +