From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/62930 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Wolfram Fenske Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Bug in gnus-group-make-articles-read? (was: nnimap: gnus-gcc-mark-as-read not working) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 23:49:45 +0200 Message-ID: <86d5fey2o6.fsf_-_@student.uni-magdeburg.de> References: <86sloh3ua8.fsf@student.uni-magdeburg.de> <86ek0036wb.fsf@student.uni-magdeburg.de> <87lku3rx3h.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1145397113 25606 80.91.229.2 (18 Apr 2006 21:51:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 21:51:53 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ding-owner+m11457@lists.math.uh.edu Tue Apr 18 23:51:51 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FVy6m-0006XZ-9b for ding-account@gmane.org; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 23:51:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1FVy6c-0006j4-00; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:51:30 -0500 Original-Received: from nas01.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.39]) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1FVy5Q-0006in-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:50:16 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by nas01.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FVy5M-00056t-UN for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:50:16 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.uni-magdeburg.de ([141.44.1.10]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1FVy5K-0007sT-00 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 23:50:10 +0200 Original-Received: from sunny.urz.uni-magdeburg.de ([141.44.8.7]) by mail.uni-magdeburg.de with esmtp (EXIM Version 4.43) for id 1FVy5G-0007IX-BP; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 23:50:09 +0200 Original-Received: from hondo (pD9515A59.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [217.81.90.89]) (authenticated bits=0) by sunny.urz.uni-magdeburg.de (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k3ILo3TH014143 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 23:50:04 +0200 Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: <87lku3rx3h.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> (Simon Josefsson's message of "Tue, 18 Apr 2006 12:34:26 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.18 (berkeley-unix) X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-Spam-Report: ---- Start SpamAssassin results -2.6 points, 5.0 required; -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list ---- End of SpamAssassin results X-Scan-Signature: 014970c9313bbe56b21e1c5005c25340 X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) Precedence: bulk Original-Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:62930 Archived-At: Simon Josefsson writes: > Wolfram Fenske writes: > >> Wolfram Fenske writes: >> >>> I have sent mail Gcc-ed to a folder on my IMAP-server. This mostly >>> works, but the copy in the sent-mail folder is never marked as read. >>> In my .gnus.el I have: >>> >>> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- >>> (setq gnus-message-archive-group "nnimap+uni:INBOX.sent-mail" >>> gnus-gcc-mark-as-read t) >>> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- >>> >>> If I use nnfolder [...], archiving works as it should. >> >> [...] >> >> For my IMAP sent-mail group, "entry" is always "nil" because "group" >> is "nnimap+uni:INBOX.sent-mail" but my ~/.newsrc.eld contains only >> entries like "INBOX.sent-mail", i. e. the prefix "nnimap+uni:" is >> missing. > > Doesn't it work to simply drop the 'nnimap+uni:' part above? Unfortunately, it doesn't, I just checked again (I knew I had tried this at some point ...). If I omit it, gnus adds the prefix "nnfolder+archive:", so I get a header field saying --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- Gcc: nnfolder+archive:INBOX.sent-mail --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- I have to admit, I cheated a bit before. Actually, my setup is --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (setq gnus-message-archive-group '("nnimap+uni:INBOX.sent-mail" "sent-mail")) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- I should have said that before. Anyway, from reading the docs, I got the impression these setting were a correct way to accomplish creating both a carbon copy on the IMAP server and one in a local folder. My logic was: use the full name to make it clear I mean the nnimap group and use an "unqualified" name for the local copy, which gnus auto-completes using the value of "gnus-message-archive-method" (I don't set this variable myself.). >> Now the question is: why don't I have the prefixes in ~/.newsrc.eld? >> Is this because nnimap is my primary gnus-select-method? A while back >> I had nnimap as my secondary select method and I think I didn't have >> this problem then. >> >> Also: is there a bug in "gnus-group-make-articles-read" or is it my >> config? [...] > > I've found that the easiest is to use a nnnil method as the primary > method, and then have all methods being equal. That sounds like the way to go [1]. Still, I wonder whether the behavior I described constitutes a bug or not. I'm thinking, yes, but I don't know enough about the internals of gnus to actually decide that. Greetings Wolfram Footnotes: [1] Maybe the distinction between primary method and secondary methods should be removed altogether. I suppose it was good for backward compatibility back in the day but now it's only asymmetric, and it appears to me that the problem I described in this thread stems from this very asymmetry. Why else would my IMAP groups (primary method) be called e. g. "INBOX.sent-mail" in my ~/.newsrc.eld file, when groups from other backends (secondary methods) are called "nnfolder+archive:sent-mail" etc.? I'm almost sure, if it wasn't for the different naming schemes, I wouldn't have had the problem. -- A: Yes. >Q: Are you sure? >>A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>>Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?