From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/61048 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Simon Josefsson Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: What's wrong with my spam.el settings now? Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 02:18:12 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87mznufe09.fsf@lucien.dreaming> <4nmzm7k9jb.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87d5n3y89s.fsf@lucien.dreaming> <4nek7iiiho.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87ek7iwjqe.fsf@lucien.dreaming> <4noe6mgu71.fsf@lifelogs.com> <4n64smz4gg.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87slvn4sl4.fsf@lucien.dreaming> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1128039919 11810 80.91.229.2 (30 Sep 2005 00:25:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:25:19 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ding-owner+m9579@lists.math.uh.edu Fri Sep 30 02:25:10 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EL8h0-0005eR-Pi for ding-account@gmane.org; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 02:24:03 +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 1EL8gw-0008Aq-00; Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:23:58 -0500 Original-Received: from nas01.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.39]) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1EL8bS-0008Al-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:18:18 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by nas01.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1EL8bQ-0005Hx-A8 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:18:18 -0500 Original-Received: from 178.230.13.217.in-addr.dgcsystems.net ([217.13.230.178] helo=yxa.extundo.com) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1EL8bP-00084E-00 for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 02:18:15 +0200 Original-Received: from latte.josefsson.org (c494102a.s-bi.bostream.se [217.215.27.65]) (authenticated bits=0) by yxa.extundo.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id j8U0ICLM020358 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 02:18:13 +0200 Original-To: ding@gnus.org OpenPGP: id=B565716F; url=http://josefsson.org/key.txt X-Hashcash: 1:21:050930:ding@gnus.org::+EGUoSt8WHJpZuSe:A1oU In-Reply-To: <87slvn4sl4.fsf@lucien.dreaming> (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn_Lind?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?str=F6m's?= message of "Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:49:43 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=failed version=3.0.3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yxa-iv X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.84, clamav-milter version 0.84e on yxa.extundo.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by yxa.extundo.com id j8U0ICLM020358 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) Precedence: bulk Original-Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:61048 Archived-At: bkhl@elektrubadur.se (Bj=F6rn Lindstr=F6m) writes: > Simon Josefsson writes: > >> Bj=F6rn, how are you quitting the group? Are you exiting it with 'q' to >> save the marks? > > Yes, that's what I did in the test I demonstrated earlier. > >> If you type G E on the group before entering, and save the list of >> articles associated with 'seen', then enter the group and read a few >> articles and quit the group using 'q', and press G E again, do the >> 'seen' list look the same? > > They change a little bit. > > If I do GE on the spam group, it can look like this: > > ((seen [...] > (11842 . 11843))) > > If I enter the group with M-1 RET, I see one article with a spam mark. I > then leave the group with q, and the last element of the seen list has > changed so that: > > ((seen [...] > (11842 . 11844))) This information and the information earlier in the thread doesn't add up for me. Earlier I interpreted the problem that seen marks were visible on articles the second time you entered a group with that article. Did I misunderstand that? Is that still the problem? If the seen list is updated as above, then the summary buffer shouldn't have a "unseen" mark on the 11844 article upon entering the group the second time. Did it? I'm not sure how this problem relate to the spam mark, but presumably it is because spam.el use the seen mark to decide which articles to mark as spam?