--- /dev/null
+Return-Path: <keevan@fastmail.fm>\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 93C2B431FAF\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 10:54:30 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -0.799\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+ tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1,\r
+ FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 1R377PjVsf6o for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+ Wed, 1 Aug 2012 10:54:30 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com\r
+ [66.111.4.29])\r
+ (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+ (No client certificate requested)\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 117E9431FAE\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 10:54:30 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.42])\r
+ by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 474AB20268;\r
+ Wed, 1 Aug 2012 13:54:29 -0400 (EDT)\r
+Received: from frontend1.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.160])\r
+ by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 01 Aug 2012 13:54:29 -0400\r
+DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=8t8.us; h=date\r
+ :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version\r
+ :content-type:in-reply-to; s=mesmtp; bh=VasT2jirgyxU6jX4i01cbM1d\r
+ t0o=; b=RkxS1WcP0mZoN7vy8pIG+4XjeUXZ2JcLRPdizPOguJxJErkrU5fmZZEo\r
+ Ry1FcvET3KfMh9N73tixXC9OobVRNWgqXs4mjkg5ATp5z0vBtgA5a3X1Uoz/LVao\r
+ DN7ltpoa8MLV0vn3p4mDGU4bZyt2yVUrZkXRyiku725uRr8cpaw=\r
+DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=\r
+ messagingengine.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id\r
+ :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=smtpout;\r
+ bh=VasT2jirgyxU6jX4i01cbM1dt0o=; b=Y0q0zZqs2uUQQrlsQLc6EbvgBfDm\r
+ K7YKCfmIZ95WH6sOh0f0k2t0NT052mVhk17TK9UJVXKgUzvSoZdE6qwbJXX2im67\r
+ UDhHZ1fRj2PE2F5f4lvOsQZUuTChp93Cu4yBDRUKd6I2GPKAFA2htovsurwnLLc6\r
+ oPjxnQoNuLeeoP8=\r
+X-Sasl-enc: 6XcJaIzcpF5pVi0DPiLl7yDm2Q+0rDa4eyPOWFItdbZh 1343843668\r
+Received: from localhost (unknown [71.220.203.171])\r
+ by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A9E378E0105;\r
+ Wed, 1 Aug 2012 13:54:28 -0400 (EDT)\r
+Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 10:54:26 -0700\r
+From: "Kevin J. McCarthy" <kevin@8t8.us>\r
+To: Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org>\r
+Subject: Re: notmuch-mutt: support for duplicate message removal\r
+Message-ID: <20120801175426.GA14470@zaogao.lan>\r
+References: <1343808582-9519-1-git-send-email-zack@upsilon.cc>\r
+ <87pq7aam8n.fsf@nikula.org>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
+Content-Disposition: inline\r
+In-Reply-To: <87pq7aam8n.fsf@nikula.org>\r
+User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)\r
+X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 13:02:31 -0700\r
+Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org, Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@upsilon.cc>\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: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 17:54:31 -0000\r
+\r
+Jani Nikula wrote:\r
+> I'm guessing you get the duplicates because you have dupes in the mail\r
+> store, and 'notmuch search --output=files' prints all the filenames\r
+> associated with each matching message, rather than any other reason. The\r
+> presented approach will only remove identical files, and will leave\r
+> behind files that are basically the same message, but have differing\r
+> headers, e.g. due to being received through different channels. Is this\r
+> what you want?\r
+\r
+This method was something we felt comfortable enabling by default.\r
+\r
+Stefano and I discussed adding a (by default off) option to remove\r
+duplicates by message-id, but wanted to get this patch merged first and\r
+then think about it.\r
+\r
+> Perhaps an option to 'notmuch search --output=files' to print only one\r
+> filename (even if there are many) per message would be interesting.\r
+\r
+This would be useful for the second approach. If it's easy to do, that\r
+would be great.\r
+\r
+-Kevin\r
+\r