Bug: spam articles not processed

Bug: spam articles not processed

[Jan Rychter]

Hi,

It seems that articles marked as spam will not be processed upon group
exit if I narrow the summary buffer in the meantime.

To replicate:

enter a summary buffer
mark some spam articles
narrow the summary (by doing for example "/ a")
press "q"
observe the spam articles just sitting there marked as read

--J.

Re: Bug: spam articles not processed

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, jan@rychter.com wrote:

> It seems that articles marked as spam will not be processed upon group
> exit if I narrow the summary buffer in the meantime.
> 
> To replicate:
> 
> enter a summary buffer
> mark some spam articles
> narrow the summary (by doing for example "/ a")
> press "q"
> observe the spam articles just sitting there marked as read

I am not familiar with limits, so would it work to call
gnus-summary-pop-limit with universal-argument or is there a better
way to do it?

Ted

Re: Bug: spam articles not processed

[Jan Rychter]

>>>>> "Ted" == Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
 Ted> On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, jan@rychter.com wrote:
 >> It seems that articles marked as spam will not be processed upon
 >> group exit if I narrow the summary buffer in the meantime.
 >>
 >> To replicate:
 >>
 >> enter a summary buffer mark some spam articles narrow the summary
 >> (by doing for example "/ a") press "q" observe the spam articles
 >> just sitting there marked as read

 Ted> I am not familiar with limits, so would it work to call
 Ted> gnus-summary-pop-limit with universal-argument or is there a
 Ted> better way to do it?

Ted,

I'm sorry -- I'm afraid I won't be able to help you here. I was quite
surprised that spam processing would be based on the final contents of
the summary buffer at all.

I'm assuming the above will work, or at least will do until we find a
better solution.

Thanks,
--Jan

Re: Bug: spam articles not processed

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, jan@rychter.com wrote:

>>>>>> "Ted" == Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:

>  Ted> I am not familiar with limits, so would it work to call
>  Ted> gnus-summary-pop-limit with universal-argument or is there a
>  Ted> better way to do it?
> 
> I'm sorry -- I'm afraid I won't be able to help you here. I was quite
> surprised that spam processing would be based on the final contents of
> the summary buffer at all.

I tested and comitted the change.  Please let me know if it works well.

Ted

Re: Bug: spam articles not processed

[Katsumi Yamaoka]

>>>>> In <4nu0rclmrx.fsf@lifelogs.com> Ted Zlatanov wrote:

> On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, jan@rychter.com wrote:

>>>>>>> "Ted" == Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:

>>  Ted> I am not familiar with limits, so would it work to call
>>  Ted> gnus-summary-pop-limit with universal-argument or is there a
>>  Ted> better way to do it?
>> 
>> I'm sorry -- I'm afraid I won't be able to help you here. I was quite
>> surprised that spam processing would be based on the final contents of
>> the summary buffer at all.

> I tested and comitted the change.  Please let me know if it works well.

I'm sorry I don't know what Jan and Ted intend to do, but the
code `(universal-argument (gnus-summary-pop-limit))' doesn't
make seance to me. ;-)

While compiling spam-summary-prepare-exit in file gnus/lisp/spam.el:
  ** universal-argument called with 1 argument, but accepts only 0

Re: Bug: spam articles not processed

[Katsumi Yamaoka]

>>>>> In <b9yd5xxh2dt.fsf@jpl.org> Katsumi Yamaoka wrote:

> make seance to me. ;-)

Oops, that's a typo of `sense'.

Re: Bug: spam articles not processed

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, yamaoka@jpl.org wrote:

>>>>> In <b9yd5xxh2dt.fsf@jpl.org> Katsumi Yamaoka wrote:
> 
>> make seance to me. ;-)
> 
> Oops, that's a typo of `sense'.

Either way, sorry for the bad code.  Fixed in CVS now.

Ted

Re: Bug: spam articles not processed

[Reiner Steib]

On Mon, Nov 29 2004, Ted Zlatanov wrote:

> Fixed in CVS now.

Why is `ignore-errors' needed there?

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo---  |  PGP key available  |  http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: Bug: spam articles not processed

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc wrote:

On Mon, Nov 29 2004, Ted Zlatanov wrote:
> 
>> Fixed in CVS now.
> 
> Why is `ignore-errors' needed there?

gnus-summary-pop-limit throws an error if there are no limits on the
stack.

I could have gone directly to the

(gnus-summary-limit nil 'pop)

call that gnus-summary-pop-limit does, but it seemed like a better
idea to go through the higher-level API.  As I already mentioned, I
don't know the summary limit functionality so if anyone else thinks
there's a better way, they are welcome to correct me.

Thanks
Ted

Re: Bug: spam articles not processed

[Ted Zlatanov]

On 30 Nov 2004, tzz@lifelogs.com wrote:

> gnus-summary-pop-limit throws an error if there are no limits on the
> stack.
> 
> I could have gone directly to the
> 
> (gnus-summary-limit nil 'pop)
> 
> call that gnus-summary-pop-limit does, but it seemed like a better
> idea to go through the higher-level API.  As I already mentioned, I
> don't know the summary limit functionality so if anyone else thinks
> there's a better way, they are welcome to correct me.

Well, popping the summary limit makes spam.el lose track of ham
messages for me (I have the tick-mark as a ham mark).  Until I figure
out what's happening, I'm disabling the summary limit pop.  Any
suggestions are most welcome.

Ted