From e92ffdd2836c0756e9e882cf0e6cfd06003aa6f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mark Walters Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:30:35 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH 5/7] cli: Make notmuch-show respect excludes. --- 2c/aa9e1c42a38e41410089405f3976112536a69d | 207 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 207 insertions(+) create mode 100644 2c/aa9e1c42a38e41410089405f3976112536a69d diff --git a/2c/aa9e1c42a38e41410089405f3976112536a69d b/2c/aa9e1c42a38e41410089405f3976112536a69d new file mode 100644 index 000000000..3ddfe7d04 --- /dev/null +++ b/2c/aa9e1c42a38e41410089405f3976112536a69d @@ -0,0 +1,207 @@ +Return-Path: +X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DEBC41ED96 + for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 04:29:32 -0800 (PST) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -1.098 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, + NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=disabled +Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id wAjogMq19Maq for ; + Tue, 31 Jan 2012 04:29:31 -0800 (PST) +Received: from mail2.qmul.ac.uk (mail2.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.6.6]) + (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) + (No client certificate requested) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D7EA41ED91 + for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 04:29:31 -0800 (PST) +Received: from smtp.qmul.ac.uk ([138.37.6.40]) + by mail2.qmul.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71) + (envelope-from ) + id 1RsCq1-0001Jd-Eu; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:29:29 +0000 +Received: from 94-192-233-223.zone6.bethere.co.uk ([94.192.233.223] + helo=localhost) + by smtp.qmul.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) + (envelope-from ) + id 1RsCq0-0001sk-UV; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:29:29 +0000 +From: Mark Walters +To: Austin Clements +Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] cli: Make notmuch-show respect excludes. +In-Reply-To: <20120131045624.GB17991@mit.edu> +References: <8762fu4aqt.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> + <1327862394-14334-5-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com> + <20120131045624.GB17991@mit.edu> +User-Agent: Notmuch/0.11+137~g98adc3d (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1 + (i486-pc-linux-gnu) +Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:30:35 +0000 +Message-ID: <87sjiwcavo.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-Sender-Host-Address: 94.192.233.223 +X-QM-SPAM-Info: Sender has good ham record. :) +X-QM-Body-MD5: 68a5891608c30e81d4b0c855c7a2a397 (of first 20000 bytes) +X-SpamAssassin-Score: -1.8 +X-SpamAssassin-SpamBar: - +X-SpamAssassin-Report: The QM spam filters have analysed this message to + determine if it is + spam. We require at least 5.0 points to mark a message as spam. + This message scored -1.8 points. + Summary of the scoring: + * -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, + * medium trust + * [138.37.6.40 listed in list.dnswl.org] + * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail + provider * (markwalters1009[at]gmail.com) + * -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay + * domain + * 0.5 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list +X-QM-Scan-Virus: ClamAV says the message is clean +Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 +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, 31 Jan 2012 12:29:32 -0000 + +On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 23:56:24 -0500, Austin Clements wrote: +> Quoth Mark Walters on Jan 29 at 6:39 pm: +> > This adds the excludes to notmuch-show.c. We do not exclude when only +> > a single message (or part) is requested. notmuch-show will output the +> > exclude information when either text or json format is requested. As +> > this changes the output from notmuch-show it breaks many tests (in a +> > trivial and expected fashion). +> > --- +> > notmuch-show.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++----- +> > 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) +> > +> > diff --git a/notmuch-show.c b/notmuch-show.c +> > index dec799c..681827f 100644 +> > --- a/notmuch-show.c +> > +++ b/notmuch-show.c +> > @@ -193,10 +193,12 @@ _get_one_line_summary (const void *ctx, notmuch_message_t *message) +> > static void +> > format_message_text (unused (const void *ctx), notmuch_message_t *message, int indent) +> > { +> > - printf ("id:%s depth:%d match:%d filename:%s\n", +> > + /* Could changing this could break users ? */ +> +> I don't think anybody seriously tries to parse the text format, so I +> wouldn't worry about breaking anything. + +Right: I will remove the comment. + +> > + printf ("id:%s depth:%d match:%d excluded:%d filename:%s\n", +> > notmuch_message_get_message_id (message), +> > indent, +> > - notmuch_message_get_flag (message, NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_MATCH), +> > + notmuch_message_get_flag (message, NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_MATCH) ? 1 : 0, +> > + notmuch_message_get_flag (message, NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_EXCLUDED) ? 1 : 0, +> > notmuch_message_get_filename (message)); +> > } +> > +> > @@ -212,9 +214,10 @@ format_message_json (const void *ctx, notmuch_message_t *message, unused (int in +> > date = notmuch_message_get_date (message); +> > relative_date = notmuch_time_relative_date (ctx, date); +> > +> > - printf ("\"id\": %s, \"match\": %s, \"filename\": %s, \"timestamp\": %ld, \"date_relative\": \"%s\", \"tags\": [", +> > + printf ("\"id\": %s, \"match\": %s, \"excluded\": %s, \"filename\": %s, \"timestamp\": %ld, \"date_relative\": \"%s\", \"tags\": [", +> +> I wonder if it would be better to switch to an array of flag names... +> That obviously would break consumers, but it's worth thinking about in +> the longer term. + +Unless you have a strong feeling for this I will leave that for a later +patch. + +> > json_quote_str (ctx_quote, notmuch_message_get_message_id (message)), +> > notmuch_message_get_flag (message, NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_MATCH) ? "true" : "false", +> > + notmuch_message_get_flag (message, NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_EXCLUDED) ? "true" : "false", +> > json_quote_str (ctx_quote, notmuch_message_get_filename (message)), +> > date, relative_date); +> > +> > @@ -1059,9 +1062,13 @@ notmuch_show_command (void *ctx, unused (int argc), unused (char *argv[])) +> > char *opt; +> > const notmuch_show_format_t *format = &format_text; +> > notmuch_show_params_t params; +> > + const char **search_exclude_tags; +> > + size_t search_exclude_tags_length; +> > int mbox = 0; +> > int format_specified = 0; +> > int i; +> > + notmuch_bool_t do_not_exclude = FALSE; +> > + unsigned int j; +> > +> > params.entire_thread = 0; +> > params.raw = 0; +> > @@ -1098,6 +1105,8 @@ notmuch_show_command (void *ctx, unused (int argc), unused (char *argv[])) +> > params.part = atoi(argv[i] + sizeof ("--part=") - 1); +> > } else if (STRNCMP_LITERAL (argv[i], "--entire-thread") == 0) { +> > params.entire_thread = 1; +> > + } else if (STRNCMP_LITERAL (argv[i], "--do-not-exclude") == 0) { +> > + do_not_exclude = TRUE; +> +> "no-exclude" if you change the others. + +See comment on first patch: will make sure they are consistent. + +> > } else if ((STRNCMP_LITERAL (argv[i], "--verify") == 0) || +> > (STRNCMP_LITERAL (argv[i], "--decrypt") == 0)) { +> > if (params.cryptoctx == NULL) { +> > @@ -1105,7 +1114,7 @@ notmuch_show_command (void *ctx, unused (int argc), unused (char *argv[])) +> > /* TODO: GMimePasswordRequestFunc */ +> > if (NULL == (params.cryptoctx = g_mime_gpg_context_new(NULL, "gpg"))) +> > #else +> > - GMimeSession* session = g_object_new(g_mime_session_get_type(), NULL); +> > + GMimeSession* session = g_object_new(g_mime_session_get_type(), NULL); +> +> Accidental reindent? + +Yes will fix. + +> > if (NULL == (params.cryptoctx = g_mime_gpg_context_new(session, "gpg"))) +> > #endif +> > fprintf (stderr, "Failed to construct gpg context.\n"); +> > @@ -1167,10 +1176,17 @@ notmuch_show_command (void *ctx, unused (int argc), unused (char *argv[])) +> > if (params.raw && params.part < 0) +> > params.part = 0; +> > +> > + /* if a single message is requested we do not use search_excludes */ +> +> Capital and period. + +Will fix. + +> > if (params.part >= 0) +> > return do_show_single (ctx, query, format, ¶ms); +> > else +> > - return do_show (ctx, query, format, ¶ms); +> > + if (!do_not_exclude) { +> > + search_exclude_tags = notmuch_config_get_search_exclude_tags +> > + (config, &search_exclude_tags_length); +> > + for (j = 0; j < search_exclude_tags_length; j++) +> > + notmuch_query_add_tag_exclude (query, search_exclude_tags[j]); +> > + return do_show (ctx, query, format, ¶ms); +> > + } +> +> I don't think this is the control flow you meant. With +> --do-not-exclude, there won't be any output. + +Good catch! Will fix. + +Thanks + +Mark + -- 2.26.2