spam.el experiences

spam.el experiences

[Andreas Fuchs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2686 bytes --]

Hi,

I just tried using spam.el to make dealing with spam easier, but ran
into these problems:

* ifile. I have used ifile to classify my spam&ham; does marking an
  article with M-d also process it as a spam article in ifile?

* nnmail-split-methods. Before I had spam.el, I used

(setq nnmail-split-fancy `(|
			   (: ifile-spam-filter
                              (|
   			        (: nnmail-split-fancy-with-parent)
			        ;; special cases
                                (any  "plus-linux.de" "plus-linux.de")
			        (from "HQ.ACM.ORG" "acm")
			        (from ".*@sil.at" "Mailbox.sil")
			        (from "mailman-owner@.*" "mailman-reminders")
			        (to  "\\(srfi-.*\\)@srfi\\.schemers\\.org" "scheme.\\1")
			        (any  "\\(srfi-.*\\)@srfi\\.schemers\\.org" "scheme.\\1")
			        ("resent-from"  "srfi-37@srfi.schemers.org" "scheme.srfi-37")
			        ("resent-from"  "\\(srfi-.*\\)@srfi\\.schemers\\.org" "scheme.\\1")
			        (any  ".*@bugs.debian.org" "debian-bugs")
			        ;; mine
			        (any ,gnus-ignored-from-addresses "Mailbox")
			        ;; group parameter splitting
			        (: gnus-group-split-fancy nil t nil)
			        ;;
			        "Mailbox.misc"))

Now, I use:

      nnmail-split-fancy `(|
			   (: spam-split)
			   (: nnmail-split-fancy-with-parent)
			   ;; special cases
			   (any  "plus-linux.de" "plus-linux.de")
			   (from "HQ.ACM.ORG" "acm")
			   (from ".*@sil.at" "Mailbox.sil")
			   (from "mailman-owner@.*" "mailman-reminders")
			   (to  "\\(srfi-.*\\)@srfi\\.schemers\\.org" "scheme.\\1")
			   (any  "\\(srfi-.*\\)@srfi\\.schemers\\.org" "scheme.\\1")
			   ("resent-from"  "srfi-37@srfi.schemers.org" "scheme.srfi-37")
			   ("resent-from"  "\\(srfi-.*\\)@srfi\\.schemers\\.org" "scheme.\\1")
			   (any  ".*@bugs.debian.org" "debian-bugs")
			   ;; to me
			   (any ,gnus-ignored-from-addresses "Mailbox")
			   ;; group parameter?
			   (: gnus-group-split-fancy nil t nil)
			   ;; 
			   "Mailbox.misc")

IMHO, these should act identical, but they don't. In fact, I get errors
every time I try to get new mails: "Error in `nnmail-split-methods';
using `bogus' mail group". I tracked the error down as far as I could,
and found out that somewhere down there, an apply gets called with only
one argument. I didn't dare remove the condition-case statement from
nnmail.el:1043, for fear of mail loss.

Is there anything wrong with my configuration or can I make this
portion of code more debugable? 

Thanks,
--
Andreas Fuchs, <asf@acm.org>, asf@jabber.at, antifuchs
Was I helpful?  Let others know:
http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=antifuchs

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Patch for ifile spam splitting in spam.el (was: Re: spam.el experiences)

[Andreas Fuchs]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1032 bytes --]


Alright, I took the time to track the second one down. Please take a
look at the patches and try them if you use ifile.

On 2002-11-16, Andreas Fuchs <asf@void.at> wrote:
> * ifile. I have used ifile to classify my spam&ham; does marking an
>   article with M-d also process it as a spam article in ifile?

I still don't know if it does and would very much like a spam.el guru
to testify (-:

> * nnmail-split-methods. Before I had spam.el, I used
[snip]
> IMHO, these should act identical, but they don't. In fact, I get
> errors every time I try to get new mails: "Error in
> `nnmail-split-methods'; using `bogus' mail group". I tracked the error
> down as far as I could, and found out that somewhere down there, an
> apply gets called with only one argument. I didn't dare remove the
> condition-case statement from nnmail.el:1043, for fear of mail loss.
> 
> Is there anything wrong with my configuration or can I make this
> portion of code more debugable? 

No configuration error, see this patch:


[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1.2: Patch for execution errors in ifile spam checking --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 600 bytes --]

Index: lisp/spam.el
===================================================================
RCS file: /usr/local/cvsroot/gnus/lisp/spam.el,v
retrieving revision 6.22
diff -c -r6.22 spam.el
--- lisp/spam.el	2002/10/22 05:04:49	6.22
+++ lisp/spam.el	2002/11/19 09:05:48
@@ -195,8 +195,8 @@
 	decision)
     (while (and list-of-checks (not decision))
       (let ((pair (pop list-of-checks)))
-	(when (eval (car pair))
-	  (setq decision (apply (cdr pair))))))
+	(when (symbol-value (car pair))
+	  (setq decision (funcall (cdr pair))))))
     (if (eq decision t)
 	nil
       decision)))

[-- Attachment #1.3: Type: text/plain, Size: 229 bytes --]


apply would not work without an argument, and did therefore (correctly)
complain. 


-- 
Andreas Fuchs, <asf@acm.org>, asf@jabber.at, antifuchs
Was I helpful?  Let others know:
http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=antifuchs

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Re: Patch for ifile spam splitting in spam.el

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, asf@void.at wrote:
> Alright, I took the time to track the second one down. Please take a
> look at the patches and try them if you use ifile.

I applied the patch, thank you very much.

Ted

Re: spam.el experiences

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Sat, 16 Nov 2002, asf@void.at wrote:
> I just tried using spam.el to make dealing with spam easier, but ran
> into these problems:
> 
> * ifile. I have used ifile to classify my spam&ham; does marking an
>   article with M-d also process it as a spam article in ifile?

Not currently.  gnus-ifile.el only supports nnml newsgroups from what
I understand, so processing on summary exit with it in spam.el (which
is backend-independent) would not work well.  spam.el does support
ifile for the splitting of incoming mail, so you can add the ifile
summary exit processing manually until we get a backend-independent
gnus-ifile.el.

The gnus-ifile.el maintainer told me the next release would be
backend-independent.  I don't know when that will be.

Thanks for testing spam.el and for the patch.

Ted

Re: spam.el experiences

[Jeremy H. Brown]

Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
> Not currently.  gnus-ifile.el only supports nnml newsgroups from what
> I understand, so processing on summary exit with it in spam.el (which
> is backend-independent) would not work well.  

ifile-gnus.el has supported all of the nnmail backends for awhile, but
I haven't gotten to nnimap yet.

> The gnus-ifile.el maintainer told me the next release would be
> backend-independent.  I don't know when that will be.

I don't either.  Probably not until January at the earliest.

Jeremy

Re: spam.el experiences

[Ted Zlatanov]

On 22 Nov 2002, jhbrown@ai.mit.edu wrote:
> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
>> Not currently.  gnus-ifile.el only supports nnml newsgroups from
>> what I understand, so processing on summary exit with it in spam.el
>> (which is backend-independent) would not work well.
> 
> ifile-gnus.el has supported all of the nnmail backends for awhile,
> but I haven't gotten to nnimap yet.

I plan to add some group parameters to spam.el (see my previous post),
so it will be possible to trigger ifile only on nnmail backends with a
minimum of configuration.  That should help.

Sorry for getting the name of ifile-gnus.el wrong :)

Thanks
Ted