From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/6810 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christopher Davis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: 5.2.20 nits/fixes (with patches for most) Date: 19 Jun 1996 11:52:51 -0400 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.68) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035147211 4806 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:53:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:53:31 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA02454 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 09:41:30 -0700 Original-Received: from loiosh.kei.com (ckd@loiosh.kei.com [192.88.144.32]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:53:30 +0200 Original-Received: (from ckd@localhost) by loiosh.kei.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA28621; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 11:52:53 -0400 (EDT) Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no X-Attribution: ckd Original-Lines: 77 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:6810 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:6810 This is the 5.2.20 included with "19.14 XEmacs Lucid (beta26)", though the only change relative to the "real" 5.2.20 is the removal of the (sit-for 0) that was so annoying me :) gnus-vis.el: - gnus-highlight-selected-summary is incorrectly highlighting the summary line; it's highlighting only the part that's within the %( and %) [this is fine, I can accept that] *except for the first and last characters*. This appears to be due to the change (in 5.2.20) to no longer use gnus-xmas-highlight-selected-summary on XEmacs 19.14 causing the section marked "Fix by Mike Dugan" to be run; that "1+" and "1-" look suspicious to me. Is there some off-by-one incompatibility between Emacs and XEmacs here? [Argh.] [No patch; I don't understand the way the code works on Emacs, so I don't want to break it.] message.el: - I missed a spot when suggesting the addition of the signature separator to the paragraph fill code in message.el; it needs to be added to both paragraph-separate and paragraph-start. [Oops.] - message-insert-signature adds a gratuitous blank line at the end of the text if the text already ends in a newline. - [semi-feature] message-insert-signature should accept a value for force of 'if-not-present, which would look for a signature separator line in the message and only insert a signature if that line is not present. This allows manually adding a signature to a message that would normally get one appended automatically by a hook. I also think the interactive use of message-insert-signature should try to prevent the user from adding multiple signatures. --- message.el.orig Wed Jun 19 11:31:50 1996 +++ message.el Wed Jun 19 11:50:34 1996 @@ -810,6 +810,7 @@ (make-local-variable 'paragraph-start) (setq paragraph-start (concat (regexp-quote mail-header-separator) "$\\|[ \t]*[-_][-_][-_]+$\\|" + "-- $\\|" paragraph-start)) (setq paragraph-separate (concat (regexp-quote mail-header-separator) "$\\|[ \t]*[-_][-_][-_]+$\\|" @@ -939,9 +940,14 @@ (defun message-insert-signature (&optional force) "Insert a signature. See documentation for the `message-signature' variable." - (interactive (list t)) + (interactive (list 'if-not-present)) (let* ((signature (cond ((and (null message-signature) + (eq force 'if-not-present)) + (save-excursion + (goto-char (point-max)) + (not (re-search-backward "^-- $" nil t)))) + ((and (null message-signature) force) t) ((message-functionp message-signature) @@ -963,7 +969,8 @@ (forward-line 1) (delete-region (point) (point-max)) ;; Insert the signature. - (insert "\n-- \n") + (or (bolp) (insert "\n")) ;start separator on new line + (insert "-- \n") (if (eq signature t) (insert-file-contents message-signature-file) (insert signature)) -- Christopher Davis "I conclude that the CDA is unconstitutional and that the First Amendment denies Congress the power to regulate protected speech on the Internet." -- Judge Stewart Dalzell in _ACLU v. Reno_