1 Return-Path: <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>
\r
2 X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
3 Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
4 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
\r
5 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17467431FAE
\r
6 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 9 Jun 2013 06:26:10 -0700 (PDT)
\r
7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org
\r
11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5
\r
12 tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
\r
13 NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=disabled
\r
14 Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])
\r
15 by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
\r
16 with ESMTP id 4fU6j5XbIM6S for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
\r
17 Sun, 9 Jun 2013 06:26:02 -0700 (PDT)
\r
18 Received: from mail2.qmul.ac.uk (mail2.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.6.6])
\r
19 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
\r
20 (No client certificate requested)
\r
21 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3771B431FB6
\r
22 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun, 9 Jun 2013 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT)
\r
23 Received: from smtp.qmul.ac.uk ([138.37.6.40])
\r
24 by mail2.qmul.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
\r
25 (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)
\r
26 id 1Ulfd6-0006Iu-Dc; Sun, 09 Jun 2013 14:25:58 +0100
\r
27 Received: from 93-97-24-31.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.24.31] helo=localhost)
\r
28 by smtp.qmul.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71)
\r
29 (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)
\r
30 id 1Ulfd5-00079h-Tk; Sun, 09 Jun 2013 14:25:56 +0100
\r
31 From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>
\r
32 To: Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
33 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] man: document notmuch search --duplicate=N
\r
34 In-Reply-To: <87ehcbo1yf.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>
\r
35 References: <cover.1370775663.git.jani@nikula.org>
\r
36 <e72d722da8706559142fcb3ea2626990b39192c5.1370775663.git.jani@nikula.org>
\r
37 <87ehcbo1yf.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>
\r
38 User-Agent: Notmuch/0.15.2+171~ge2f30a2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1
\r
39 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
\r
40 Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2013 14:25:54 +0100
\r
41 Message-ID: <87bo7fo1p9.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>
\r
43 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
\r
44 X-Sender-Host-Address: 93.97.24.31
\r
45 X-QM-SPAM-Info: Sender has good ham record. :)
\r
46 X-QM-Body-MD5: 0e131666f761580328ed6425bc0b8b3c (of first 20000 bytes)
\r
47 X-SpamAssassin-Score: -0.0
\r
48 X-SpamAssassin-SpamBar: /
\r
49 X-SpamAssassin-Report: The QM spam filters have analysed this message to
\r
51 spam. We require at least 5.0 points to mark a message as spam.
\r
52 This message scored -0.0 points.
\r
53 Summary of the scoring:
\r
54 * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
\r
55 provider * (markwalters1009[at]gmail.com)
\r
56 * -0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
\r
57 X-QM-Scan-Virus: ClamAV says the message is clean
\r
58 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
59 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
\r
61 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."
\r
62 <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>
\r
63 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,
\r
64 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>
\r
65 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>
\r
66 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
\r
67 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>
\r
68 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,
\r
69 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>
\r
70 X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2013 13:26:10 -0000
\r
73 Sorry about that: I meant to cancel the message rather than sending it.
\r
75 What I was wondering was whether we should change the wording of the
\r
76 manpage to make it clear that notmuch search --output=files returns all
\r
77 filenames where any of the copies matches the search terms (I think; I
\r
78 was going to check before sending anything). In particular,
\r
80 notmuch search --output=files folder:a_folder may return filenames not
\r
83 (This is slightly more noticeable with this patch than before as
\r
84 notmuch search --output=files --duplicate=1 folder:a_folder could give
\r
85 no results in folder a_folder
\r
87 (None of the above is meant to be a criticism of this patch: I have
\r
88 only sent this email due to my accidental sending of the previous message)
\r
97 What IOn Sun, 09 Jun 2013, Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com> wrote:
\r
98 > One thing that slightly bothers me with this set (which in some sense is
\r
99 > already true) is doing a search of the form
\r
101 > notmuch search --output=files folder:<a_folder>
\r
105 > On Sun, 09 Jun 2013, Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org> wrote:
\r
107 >> man/man1/notmuch-search.1 | 11 +++++++++++
\r
108 >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
\r
110 >> diff --git a/man/man1/notmuch-search.1 b/man/man1/notmuch-search.1
\r
111 >> index 1c1e049..4d8b3d3 100644
\r
112 >> --- a/man/man1/notmuch-search.1
\r
113 >> +++ b/man/man1/notmuch-search.1
\r
114 >> @@ -158,6 +158,17 @@ but the "match count" is the number of matching non-excluded messages in the
\r
115 >> thread, rather than the number of matching messages.
\r
120 >> +.BR \-\-duplicate=N
\r
123 >> +.BR --output=files ,
\r
124 >> +output the Nth filename associated with each message matching the
\r
125 >> +query (N is 1-based). If N is greater than the number of files
\r
126 >> +associated with the message, don't print anything.
\r
131 >> This command supports the following special exit status codes
\r
135 >> _______________________________________________
\r
136 >> notmuch mailing list
\r
137 >> notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
138 >> http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
\r