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

[Andreas Fuchs <asf@void.at>]

[-- 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 --]