[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#9831: cause of bug found! [PATCH]
From: |
Mark Lillibridge |
Subject: |
bug#9831: cause of bug found! [PATCH] |
Date: |
Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:53:58 -0700 |
> > Sorry, more background. The bug OP and I am reporting is as
> > follows: we have two Rmail buffers, say A and B, each with summary
> > buffers. However, only A and it's summary are displayed in windows. We
> > then output the current message from A to B via 'o'. The bug is that at
> > this point the summary for B becomes displayed when it should not.
>
> I'm probably too silly to understand. John was talking about "o" not
> doing the right thing, but IIUC "o" calls `rmail-output' and not
> `rmail-summary-output' in his case. At least that's what I deduct from
> his "When reading mail o writes the message to another file, or buffer
> if it is loaded" and the doc-string of `rmail-output' saying "Append
> this message to mail file FILE-NAME". Then John says that "It also
> changes to that buffer and this seriously interferes with work flow, as
> it is inconsistent with when the file is not in a buffer" but
> unfortunately I don't understand what "changes to that buffer" means in
> this context.
Yes, 'o' calls rmail-output from an Rmail buffer and
rmail-summary-output from the associated summary buffer. Both suffer
from the bug we are talking about.
What John means by "changes to that buffer" is that his window
showing rmail-buffer A changes to a *different* rmail-buffer, namely the
one he was outputting the message to. Note that this buffer change does
not occur when the targeted rmail file is not held in a buffer, hence
John's comments about inconsistency.
> > but because of the bug if this summary was produced by rmail-summary, it
> > will be displayed.
> >
> > Why? rmail-update-summary makes a saved function call (depending on
> > the filtering requested, a different call is necessary to rebuild the
> > summary) to update the summary. If the summary was originally created via
> > rmail-summary, then the saved call is (rmail-summary), which because of
> > the bug displays the summary.
> >
> > Why? Because someone incorrectly added code to display the summary
> > buffer on summary update to rmail-summary.
>
> According to our Logs `rmail-update-summary' hasn't been changed for
> many years.
I never said that function got changed; remember that it is an
indirection function. One of the functions it can call, namely
rmail-summary, has been changed since Rmail 22. I don't have convenient
access to the source control system so I can't tell you when that change
was made.
> I still suppose your's is a different bug. But I suspect that any of
> these bugs may have its cause in a recent change of the buffer display
> routines. Unfortunately, I'm not of much help here since I don't use
> rmail.
Let's ask John if my patch makes his bug go away. It certainly
makes mine go way.
- Mark
- bug#9831: 24.0.90; o and c-o in RMAIL change buffer, john ffitch, 2011/10/22
- bug#9831: narrowing the bug down, Mark Lillibridge, 2011/10/22
- bug#9831: narrowing the bug down, Mark Lillibridge, 2011/10/22
- bug#9831: cause of bug found! [PATCH], Mark Lillibridge, 2011/10/22
- bug#9831: cause of bug found! [PATCH], martin rudalics, 2011/10/23
- bug#9831: cause of bug found! [PATCH], Mark Lillibridge, 2011/10/23
- bug#9831: cause of bug found! [PATCH], martin rudalics, 2011/10/24
- bug#9831: cause of bug found! [PATCH],
Mark Lillibridge <=
- bug#9831: cause of bug found! [PATCH], martin rudalics, 2011/10/27
bug#9831: Your bug report re: o and c-o in RMAIL change buffer, Mark Lillibridge, 2011/10/26