1 Return-Path: <jrollins@finestructure.net>
\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 67E20431FBD
\r
6 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 08:44:19 -0800 (PST)
\r
7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org
\r
11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.806 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.193,
\r
12 BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] autolearn=ham
\r
13 Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])
\r
14 by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
\r
15 with ESMTP id DFjC5dCnhd3A for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
\r
16 Fri, 5 Feb 2010 08:44:18 -0800 (PST)
\r
17 Received: from brinza.cc.columbia.edu (brinza.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.29.8])
\r
18 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2A72431FAE
\r
19 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 08:44:18 -0800 (PST)
\r
20 Received: from servo.finestructure.net (geco.phys.columbia.edu
\r
22 (user=jgr2110 author=jrollins@finestructure.net mech=PLAIN bits=0)
\r
23 by brinza.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o15GiIuO011689
\r
24 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT)
\r
25 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 11:44:18 -0500 (EST)
\r
26 Received: from jrollins by servo.finestructure.net with local (Exim 4.71)
\r
27 (envelope-from <jrollins@finestructure.net>) id 1NdRI2-000303-66
\r
28 for notmuch@notmuchmail.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:44:18 -0500
\r
29 From: Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>
\r
30 To: Notmuch Mail <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
\r
31 Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:44:15 -0500
\r
32 Message-ID: <87636bws2o.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
\r
34 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
\r
35 micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
\r
36 X-No-Spam-Score: Local
\r
37 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 128.59.29.8
\r
38 Subject: [notmuch] strange behavior of indexing of and searching for strings
\r
40 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
41 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
\r
43 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."
\r
44 <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>
\r
45 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,
\r
46 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>
\r
47 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>
\r
48 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
\r
49 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>
\r
50 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,
\r
51 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>
\r
52 X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:44:19 -0000
\r
55 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
\r
57 Hey, folks. I've been noticing some strange behavior of notmuch search
\r
58 results for strings containing '[]'. Here are some searches for some
\r
59 exact strings in messages subjects:
\r
61 servo:~ 0$ notmuch search subject:'emacs paned UI'
\r
62 thread:533da424197bb6ba61a42b667d5d8d8f Wed. 14:12 [2/2] Tad Fisher, Jame=
\r
63 son Rollins; [notmuch] Emacs paned UI ()
\r
66 So that's fine and expected. This however is not:
\r
68 servo:~ 0$ notmuch search subject:'[notmuch] emacs paned UI'
\r
69 thread:5f2cb4b108773a39161b33c86e54f7fd 4 mins. ago [1/1] Jameson Rollins;=
\r
70 [notmuch] loss of duplicate messages (inbox)
\r
73 Not only did it not turn up the message that *does* match that exact
\r
74 string in it's subject line, it actually turns up a completely different
\r
75 message that doesn't match the search term at all!
\r
77 This search actually turns up both:
\r
79 servo:~ 0$ notmuch search subject:'notmuch emacs paned UI'
\r
80 thread:5f2cb4b108773a39161b33c86e54f7fd 5 mins. ago [1/1] Jameson Rollins;=
\r
81 [notmuch] loss of duplicate messages (inbox)
\r
82 thread:533da424197bb6ba61a42b667d5d8d8f Wed. 14:12 [2/2] Tad Fisher, Jame=
\r
83 son Rollins; [notmuch] Emacs paned UI ()
\r
86 Which is again strange, because the second message does not at all match
\r
89 Does anyone have any idea what's going on here? I think I saw mention
\r
90 of this issue on IRC somewhere, but I thought I should bring it up
\r
91 explicitly here. This is definitely some buggy behavior.
\r
96 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
\r
98 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
\r
99 Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
\r
101 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJLbErfAAoJEO00zqvie6q8LlYP/1pikkmCPC9tzetQ7G5/J8A6
\r
102 5/IZQC6GvdX2DJrlqozSijUu4Jq2jHZ9veX7S7/VwOyXVfWEaQF1T9PAtPb+crro
\r
103 YVoP7DRHF4Bxz6TCA6mgrVvZhBOqFICGkEQUTy5Jjy5oQsMv0LaVZ/jpUaeRfVuw
\r
104 /SL2qopuhu1Dg74Iw32aEx3pPeu1d0gvtDPvym21vAzSDOnRTQn6Ho5a9GaBFtln
\r
105 Ml9hSMLpALcBPogLr2cacu4SzqWDrYYglwOuR1foJCvOsz65GRAjFOp5KFvU0t8k
\r
106 meXpu6WZqUxIBZp495/VXMv9MvVcNxUqpGS8oinGXnLFiQS6KGQ3lCff2m/ii2pQ
\r
107 XeA+pUeQOs8okhkUBn8HZ7i802lQXBs494D2gGeorvj8iY0cQY5CeHYMzGE3ZW5z
\r
108 XBkGO3oy3/5TzYvMvj1qIOwjXvq9KjRWJmEglYMij3wbnvcl99rNJZwnaYy6JoTW
\r
109 YgFJQuM05gAUevwbXrZAK3Fm72b+O0q5fKPwCHkPpDlCXTVkrg9EC+F/eNUKz7sD
\r
110 JJVSSRDP/9K8Md2kN9KYopMgiCQr3loob/4BOvhmR2OqsIkSesngbFXlg9jzw69c
\r
111 JJX9/caoQJ9Mqj37vlk9TTk1trww/5d6KVMoFwYjM0O1My5OvxA/53viv4yME2qe
\r
112 DHm9Tb8KJUgs2PC49Jpb
\r
114 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
\r