From: Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>
To: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org,
	amdragon@MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: [PATCH] emacs: show: lazy part bugfix
In-Reply-To: <1377246875-7784-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com>
References: <1377246875-7784-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.16+1~g9f861e2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Sun, 01 Sep 2013 09:18:35 -0700
Message-ID: <871u58a52c.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
	micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Precedence: list

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Aug 23 2013, Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com> wrote:
> The lazy part handling had a subtle bug. Notmuch stores the part
> information as a text property with the displayed part so attachment
> handling (saving viewing etc work).
>
> Now, some mime parts have subparts and to avoid overwriting the
> sub-part data notmuch checks and if part data is already recorded it
> does not overwrite it.
>
> Now with lazy part handling this could fail: there is already part
> data stored. In the common case it works as the part type information
> was stored when the lazy-part button was inserted. However, this fails
> if the lazy part has sub-parts: notmuch had no idea these existed
> until the lazy part insertion.
>
> We fix this by removing any existing part-information from the
> relevant region before doing the lazy insertion.
> ---
> This was shown up by Istvan's patch in id:m3r4dtgz9k.fsf@zsu.kismala.com =
and=20
> the bug found by Jamie in id:87fvu4fl25.fsf@servo.finestructure.net
>
> I think this is essentially the right patch: I am not certain about
> the +1 in the removing the property. It seems to be needed but maybe
> something with front/back sticky would be better.
>
> Also this definitely needs more testing before going into master: this
> code is definitely fragile.

Hey, Mark.  I have just tested this patch and it seems to be fixing the
issue I was seeing.  With Istvan's patch the once hidden parts are now
exposed with buttons, and with this patch the buttons now work as
expected.

I can't really speak to the correctness of this patch, but it does seem
to be working, and doesn't seem to have any adverse side effects that I
can see.

As a reminder, this patch and Istvan's do fix an actual bug in notmuch,
so both should be pushed unless anyone see's anything wrong with either
of them.

Thanks so much for the fixes, guys.

jamie.

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
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=EMOu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--