From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/50179 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Reiner Steib <4.uce.03.r.s@nurfuerspam.de> Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Should gnus-summary-repair-multipart modify files on disk? (was: New summary part commands?) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 21:20:18 +0100 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <84of5bvxfq.fsf@lucy.is.informatik.uni-duisburg.de> <84of58jdh9.fsf@lucy.is.informatik.uni-duisburg.de> Reply-To: reiner.steib@gmx.de 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: main.gmane.org 1045686186 8226 80.91.224.249 (19 Feb 2003 20:23:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 20:23:06 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18lajW-00024W-00 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 21:22:22 +0100 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 18lahx-0003cM-00; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 14:20:45 -0600 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Wed, 19 Feb 2003 14:21:43 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (sclp3.sclp.com [66.230.238.2]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA21026 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 14:21:28 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (qmail 59875 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2003 20:20:21 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 59870 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2003 20:20:21 -0000 Original-Received: from theotp5.physik.uni-ulm.de (134.60.10.145) by 66.230.238.6 with SMTP; 19 Feb 2003 20:20:21 -0000 Original-Received: (from ste@localhost) by theotp5.physik.uni-ulm.de (8.11.2/8.11.2) id h1JKKIZ11920; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 21:20:18 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: theotp5.physik.uni-ulm.de: ste set sender to 4.uce.03.r.s@nurfuerspam.de using -f Original-To: ding@gnus.org X-Face: 3Phac&+dw=IZHjhua]bp}LH<*p{qzj8u+ Reiner Steib <4.uce.03.r.s@nurfuerspam.de> writes: >> BTW, for `gnus-summary-repair-multipart' I think we should add a >> `y-or-no-p' because it may *destroy* an article (on writable back >> ends), e.g. if the original article wasn't b0rked. > > Really? I was shocked, so I quickly scanned the code,=20 ,----[ C-h f gnus-with-article RET ] | gnus-with-article is a Lisp macro in `gnus-sum'. | (gnus-with-article ARTICLE &rest FORMS) |=20 | Select ARTICLE and perform FORMS in the original article buffer. | Then replace the article with the result. `---- Note the last sentence. > but it appears to only modify the buffer, not the file on disk. It *does* modify the article disk if you use nnfolder (Article from Gmane) copied to nnfolder:Test and `K m'-ed: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- $ diff -U1 multi?.mbox --- multi1.mbox Wed Feb 19 21:06:34 2003 +++ multi2.mbox Wed Feb 19 21:06:47 2003 [...] @@ -12,4 +12,2 @@ [...] -Mime-Version: 1.0 -Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=3Dpgp-sha1; [...] @@ -40,4 +38,8 @@ [...] +Mime-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=3D"mP3DRpeJDSE+ciuQ" [...] --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- In this case, the repairing was successful. But after reading , I did some tests and at least once, the `repaired' article was corrupt. Maybe I'm able to reproduce it later. I didn't think that it's a bug, because the user isn't supposed to `repair' intact articles. ;-) So the question is: Should gnus-summary-repair-multipart modify files on disk or only modify the buffer? Bye, Reiner. --=20 ,,, (o o) ---ooO-(_)-Ooo--- PGP key available via WWW http://rsteib.home.pages.de/