From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/63353 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rn_Mork?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Gcc when article is already mailed Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 14:57:00 +0200 Organization: Death organ De-bay Message-ID: <8764j3nbdv.fsf@obelix.mork.no> References: <87y7w06k05.fsf@nokile.rath.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1150289920 15088 80.91.229.2 (14 Jun 2006 12:58:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 12:58:40 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ding-owner+m11880@lists.math.uh.edu Wed Jun 14 14:58:28 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 1FqUwt-0001lR-KZ for ding-account@gmane.org; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 14:58:19 +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 1FqUwo-0006da-00; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 07:58:15 -0500 Original-Received: from nas01.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.39]) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1FqUwb-0006dV-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 07:58:01 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by nas01.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FqUwZ-0006uP-Oz for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 07:58:01 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1FqUwY-0000Ee-00 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 14:57:58 +0200 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1FqUwA-0001c3-EW for ding@gnus.org; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 14:57:34 +0200 Original-Received: from obelix.mork.no ([148.122.252.2]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 14:57:34 +0200 Original-Received: from bmork by obelix.mork.no with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 14:57:34 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: ding@gnus.org Original-Lines: 49 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: obelix.mork.no User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:8+4doH9MmAv2lbb78vSKglDpeXA= X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) Precedence: bulk Original-Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:63353 Archived-At: Nikolaus Rath writes: > I just had the problem that I wrote a mail with Gcc to an nnimap > group. When I pressed C-c C-c, the nnimap connection had timed out, so > storing the mail in the Gcc group failed. Nevertheless the mail was > sent using smtp: > > ,---- > | Sending... > | Sending via mail... > | Opening nnimap server... > | imap: Connecting to ebox.rath.org... > | Opening STARTTLS connection to `ebox.rath.org'...done > | imap: Connecting with STARTTLS... > | imap: Connecting to ebox.rath.org...failed > | Opening nnimap server...failed > | gnus-inews-do-gcc: Can't open server nnimap: > `---- > > Then I ended up in buffer containing the message. Restablishing the > imap connection was no problem in the server buffer, but I wasn't able > to figure out how to place the message in the group now. C-c C-c sends > the message by mail again. > > Is there a way to store the message in the Gcc group afterwards that I > was unable to found? Otherwise I think that the message should not be > send at all if the Gcc group is not accessible. I've used to work around this problem by modifying the original, adding X- in front of "To:", "Cc:" and "Bcc:" to avoid resending the message when hitting C-c C-c again. But it is a bit annoying and it would be nice if this could simply Just Work(tm). Either as you suggest, or at least by offering some possibility of retrying the IMAP connection without also resending the message via SMTP. I guess there is a reason why it does things this way: Gnus can't know that the Gcc will fail before trying it, at which time the message has already been sent to via SMTP. Maybe trying Gcc first would be an acceptable fix? Does it have any downside? I guess it will cause the reversed problem: Gcc works but SMTP fails. But that would probably be better, given enough warning so that the user knows the message was not sent. Or? Bjørn -- Marxist!