* has "incorporating new mail" bug been fixed yet? @ 1999-12-23 17:51 Randal L. Schwartz 1999-12-23 18:23 ` David S. Goldberg 1999-12-23 18:39 ` Bud Rogers 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Randal L. Schwartz @ 1999-12-23 17:51 UTC (permalink / raw) So where are we at? Did the latest release fix it so that I can: M-g on a single nnml group 2 M-g to get all nnml groups at level 2-1 gnus-no-server to start at my level 2-1 groups without the annoying dozens of "no mail" messages? (I know, Randal, try it, and let us know...) Well, just wanted to save the upgrade time if that's still known broken. :) -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 <merlyn@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/> Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: has "incorporating new mail" bug been fixed yet? 1999-12-23 17:51 has "incorporating new mail" bug been fixed yet? Randal L. Schwartz @ 1999-12-23 18:23 ` David S. Goldberg 1999-12-23 20:16 ` Randal L. Schwartz 1999-12-23 18:39 ` Bud Rogers 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: David S. Goldberg @ 1999-12-23 18:23 UTC (permalink / raw) > So where are we at? Did the latest release fix it so that I can: > M-g on a single nnml group Yes. > 2 M-g to get all nnml groups at level 2-1 Yes. > gnus-no-server to start at my level 2-1 groups Yes. > without the annoying dozens of "no mail" messages? No :-( My workaround: nnml incorporation works without all the "no mail" messages if you run gnus and use 'g'. In fact, I've found that to be so fast now that I don't mind the connection to my primary nntp server. Of course that nntp server is only three hops away on a mostly 100baseT switched network. I've added this advice (defadvice gnus-group-list-groups (around set-default-list-level activate) ad-do-it (if (ad-get-arg 0) (setq gnus-group-default-list-level (ad-get-arg 0)))) to ensure that when I do a '2 l' (or '1 l') only the groups on that level are displayed and subsequent calls to 'l' don't bring in all the higher ones. I don't fully understand the lisp needed to fix this. I *think* that nnml-request-scan (and probably others, too) needs to be made specifically aware of a directory mail-source but I haven't had time to try to actually write code to make it do so. -- Dave Goldberg Post: The Mitre Corporation\MS B325\202 Burlington Rd.\Bedford, MA 01730 Phone: 781-271-3887 Email: dsg@mitre.org ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: has "incorporating new mail" bug been fixed yet? 1999-12-23 18:23 ` David S. Goldberg @ 1999-12-23 20:16 ` Randal L. Schwartz 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Randal L. Schwartz @ 1999-12-23 20:16 UTC (permalink / raw) >>>>> "David" == David S Goldberg <dsg@mitre.org> writes: >> So where are we at? Did the latest release fix it so that I can: >> M-g on a single nnml group David> Yes. >> 2 M-g to get all nnml groups at level 2-1 David> Yes. >> gnus-no-server to start at my level 2-1 groups David> Yes. >> without the annoying dozens of "no mail" messages? David> No :-( Ahh, so it's still a bug. Does Lars know it's still a bug? :) -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 <merlyn@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/> Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: has "incorporating new mail" bug been fixed yet? 1999-12-23 17:51 has "incorporating new mail" bug been fixed yet? Randal L. Schwartz 1999-12-23 18:23 ` David S. Goldberg @ 1999-12-23 18:39 ` Bud Rogers 1999-12-23 20:18 ` Randal L. Schwartz 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Bud Rogers @ 1999-12-23 18:39 UTC (permalink / raw) merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) writes: > M-g on a single nnml group I don't ordinarily use that, but I just tried it in this group and it appeared to work. > 2 M-g to get all nnml groups at level 2-1 I use 2g to get all nnml groups at level 2-1. If there are any annoying messages they go by too fast to see. HTH -- Bud Rogers <budr@sirinet.net> http://www.sirinet.net/~budr/zamm.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: has "incorporating new mail" bug been fixed yet? 1999-12-23 18:39 ` Bud Rogers @ 1999-12-23 20:18 ` Randal L. Schwartz 1999-12-23 20:39 ` Bud Rogers 1999-12-23 20:39 ` David S. Goldberg 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Randal L. Schwartz @ 1999-12-23 20:18 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: ding >>>>> "Bud" == Bud Rogers <budr@sirinet.net> writes: Bud> merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) writes: >> M-g on a single nnml group Bud> I don't ordinarily use that, but I just tried it in this group and it Bud> appeared to work. >> 2 M-g to get all nnml groups at level 2-1 Bud> I use 2g to get all nnml groups at level 2-1. If there are any annoying Bud> messages they go by too fast to see. Do you have a directory source? I use procmail-like software to presort my mail, so I have (mumble) 50-some .spool files in my .incoming directory. And I see 50-some "new messages" messages each time. It probably would be OK if GNUS deleted the files, but I think we'd have a locking staredown problem at that point. -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 <merlyn@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/> Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: has "incorporating new mail" bug been fixed yet? 1999-12-23 20:18 ` Randal L. Schwartz @ 1999-12-23 20:39 ` Bud Rogers 1999-12-23 20:39 ` David S. Goldberg 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Bud Rogers @ 1999-12-23 20:39 UTC (permalink / raw) merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) writes: > Do you have a directory source? I use procmail-like software to > presort my mail, so I have (mumble) 50-some .spool files in my > .incoming directory. And I see 50-some "new messages" messages each > time. It probably would be OK if GNUS deleted the files, but I think > we'd have a locking staredown problem at that point. No, I use nnml-split-fancy. Sorry. -- Bud Rogers <budr@sirinet.net> http://www.sirinet.net/~budr/zamm.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: has "incorporating new mail" bug been fixed yet? 1999-12-23 20:18 ` Randal L. Schwartz 1999-12-23 20:39 ` Bud Rogers @ 1999-12-23 20:39 ` David S. Goldberg 1999-12-24 6:15 ` Randal L. Schwartz 1999-12-24 23:46 ` Simon Josefsson 1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: David S. Goldberg @ 1999-12-23 20:39 UTC (permalink / raw) > Do you have a directory source? I use procmail-like software to > presort my mail, so I have (mumble) 50-some .spool files in my > ..incoming directory. And I see 50-some "new messages" messages > each time. It probably would be OK if GNUS deleted the files, but I > think we'd have a locking staredown problem at that point. Even if GNUS did delete the empty files, it wouldn't make a difference. As you note, the problem is due to using a directory source, but it's not the case that the existence of 50-some .spool files causes the problem. The problem is that you've got 50-some nnml groups at levels 1 and 2 and the directory is being searched for a file for each one, whether or not such a file exists. This is apparently (to me, based on the explanation I only vaguely recall from Simon) due to nnml not having a particular feature in the nnml-request-scan function. I've tried to look at what Simon did with nnimap-request-scan, but I just plain don't get the code. This is, in my opinion, a side effect of the design of mail-source versus the old procmail specific code. I am quite certain that Lars is aware of this, I'm not so certain he considers it a bug. -- Dave Goldberg Post: The Mitre Corporation\MS B325\202 Burlington Rd.\Bedford, MA 01730 Phone: 781-271-3887 Email: dsg@mitre.org ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: has "incorporating new mail" bug been fixed yet? 1999-12-23 20:39 ` David S. Goldberg @ 1999-12-24 6:15 ` Randal L. Schwartz 1999-12-24 23:46 ` Simon Josefsson 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Randal L. Schwartz @ 1999-12-24 6:15 UTC (permalink / raw) >>>>> "David" == David S Goldberg <dsg@mitre.org> writes: David> As you note, the problem is due to using a directory source, but it's David> not the case that the existence of 50-some .spool files causes the David> problem. The problem is that you've got 50-some nnml groups at levels David> 1 and 2 and the directory is being searched for a file for each one, David> whether or not such a file exists. This is apparently (to me, based David> on the explanation I only vaguely recall from Simon) due to nnml not David> having a particular feature in the nnml-request-scan function. I've David> tried to look at what Simon did with nnimap-request-scan, but I just David> plain don't get the code. This is, in my opinion, a side effect of David> the design of mail-source versus the old procmail specific code. I am David> quite certain that Lars is aware of this, I'm not so certain he David> considers it a bug. Well, when qgnus issues only one message, but pgnus issues hundreds of messages, I can't see how that would not be considered a "bug" or at least a degradation in performance. I know, "patches welcome". Maybe I'll have to dust off my elisp reading skills. -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 <merlyn@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/> Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: has "incorporating new mail" bug been fixed yet? 1999-12-23 20:39 ` David S. Goldberg 1999-12-24 6:15 ` Randal L. Schwartz @ 1999-12-24 23:46 ` Simon Josefsson 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Simon Josefsson @ 1999-12-24 23:46 UTC (permalink / raw) David S. Goldberg <dsg@mitre.org> writes: > As you note, the problem is due to using a directory source, but it's > not the case that the existence of 50-some .spool files causes the > problem. The problem is that you've got 50-some nnml groups at levels > 1 and 2 and the directory is being searched for a file for each one, > whether or not such a file exists. Right. > This is apparently (to me, based on the explanation I only vaguely > recall from Simon) due to nnml not having a particular feature in > the nnml-request-scan function. Actually, it's because nnml don't have `nnml-retrieve-groups', but that's not relevant -- writing a `nnfoo-retrieve-groups' is only useful if the backend is slow on doing `nnfoo-request-group' which isn't the case for nnml (it was for nnimap though), and it's not what's causing theese messages. The annoying messages are a result of how the `directory' mail-source work. "Normal" mail-sources (that is, all other mail-sources than `directory') get queried once when you fetch new mail. For `directory' mail-sources, there's a hack in `nnmail-get-new-mail' which change the mail-source for every group you fetch new mail in. I haven't really used directory mail-sources, but I believe the hack is there to make directory mail-sources work as expected, which would be to make mail in file "foo" should end up in nnml group "foo" and nowhere else. This means that instead of having 1 mail-source for your n nnml groups which one could be led into believing when looking at `mail-sources' you have in fact n mail-sources, one for each of your n nnml groups, and the thing you write in your `mail-sources' is a template that is expanded to the correct mail-source at run-time. When you do `1 g' to get new mail for some of your nnml groups, you'll get one message for every mail-source that is being queried. If you have 10 nnml groups on level 1, there will be 10 different mail-sources queried for new mail. And you'll get 10 messages about there being none (or some, or whatever) mail fetched from that mail-source. I believe this discussion came up recently, just after my speed-up patch for scanning mail-sources only once. Since that patch really shouldn't change any underlaying behaviour, something might be wrong with it. I reverted to PGnus 0.99 (which is before my patch was introduced) and I was able to reproduce the behaviour Randal describes. Randal (and other directory mail-source users), when did you start seeing this behaviour? Recently? Was it introduced with PGnus 0.99? If not, I think this is how it's supposed to work. You get one message for each of your mail-source, and that will help you to debug things if one of the n fetches failed. This (untested) patch change the verbosity level on some of the related messages, it should make the "annoying" messages go away. I don't think this should be commited as-is (or at all), maybe the verbosity level should be different for `directory' mail-sources and other mail-sources? That isn't very clean either. Index: nnmail.el =================================================================== RCS file: /usr/local/cvsroot/gnus/lisp/nnmail.el,v retrieving revision 5.44 diff -w -u -u -w -r5.44 nnmail.el --- nnmail.el 1999/12/07 05:09:43 5.44 +++ nnmail.el 1999/12/25 01:09:11 @@ -1444,7 +1444,7 @@ ;; The we go through all the existing mail source specification ;; and fetch the mail from each. (while (setq source (pop fetching-sources)) - (nnheader-message 4 "%s: Reading incoming mail from %s..." + (nnheader-message 8 "%s: Reading incoming mail from %s..." method (car source)) (when (setq new (mail-source-fetch @@ -1458,19 +1458,18 @@ (incf total new) (incf i))) ;; If we did indeed read any incoming spools, we save all info. - (if (zerop total) - (nnheader-message 4 "%s: Reading incoming mail (no new mail)...done" - method (car source)) + (unless (zerop total) (nnmail-save-active (nnmail-get-value "%s-group-alist" method) (nnmail-get-value "%s-active-file" method)) (when exit-func (funcall exit-func)) (run-hooks 'nnmail-read-incoming-hook) - (nnheader-message 4 "%s: Reading incoming mail (%d new)...done" method - total)) + (nnheader-message 4 "%s: Read %d new mail from %s." method total + (car source))) ;; Close the message-id cache. (nnmail-cache-close) + (nnheader-message 8 "%s: Reading incoming mail...done" method total) ;; Allow the user to hook. (run-hooks 'nnmail-post-get-new-mail-hook)))) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1999-12-24 23:46 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 1999-12-23 17:51 has "incorporating new mail" bug been fixed yet? Randal L. Schwartz 1999-12-23 18:23 ` David S. Goldberg 1999-12-23 20:16 ` Randal L. Schwartz 1999-12-23 18:39 ` Bud Rogers 1999-12-23 20:18 ` Randal L. Schwartz 1999-12-23 20:39 ` Bud Rogers 1999-12-23 20:39 ` David S. Goldberg 1999-12-24 6:15 ` Randal L. Schwartz 1999-12-24 23:46 ` Simon Josefsson
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).