From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.user/10321 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.user Subject: Re: Automatically authenticating at local imap server Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 21:07:31 +0100 Message-ID: <87prv9n918.fsf@physik3.gwdg.de> References: <87fxw9lr6x.fsf@gaura-nitai.dyndns.org> <87odax2jzi.fsf@member.fsf.org> <874pco7bot.fsf@member.fsf.org> <861w7ruyme.fsf@lifelogs.com> <86ve52nm4d.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1202328505 26620 80.91.229.12 (6 Feb 2008 20:08:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 20:08:25 +0000 (UTC) To: info-gnus-english@gnu.org Original-X-From: info-gnus-english-bounces+gegu-info-gnus-english=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 06 21:08:44 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gegu-info-gnus-english@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JMqZF-00022Z-L8 for gegu-info-gnus-english@m.gmane.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2008 21:08:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JMqYm-0001NE-Va for gegu-info-gnus-english@m.gmane.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:07:56 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JMqYk-0001MR-NX for info-gnus-english@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:07:54 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JMqYi-0001LW-Oi for info-gnus-english@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:07:54 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JMqYi-0001LN-GB for info-gnus-english@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:07:52 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JMqYh-00072A-50 for info-gnus-english@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:07:51 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JMqYX-0000as-03 for info-gnus-english@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2008 20:07:41 +0000 Original-Received: from dslb-082-083-045-187.pools.arcor-ip.net ([82.83.45.187]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 06 Feb 2008 20:07:40 +0000 Original-Received: from de_bb by dslb-082-083-045-187.pools.arcor-ip.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 06 Feb 2008 20:07:40 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 23 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dslb-082-083-045-187.pools.arcor-ip.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:MCuhtS5MLyCzMYTfMPy7JKQNjwE= X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: info-gnus-english@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Announcements and discussions for GNUS, the GNU Emacs Usenet newsreader \(in English\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: info-gnus-english-bounces+gegu-info-gnus-english=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: info-gnus-english-bounces+gegu-info-gnus-english=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.user:10321 Archived-At: Ted Zlatanov writes: > D> Yes, I guess the best way would be to first check the registry for the > D> group and do the additional mairix search only if the registry is not > D> loaded or does not know the location of the message. I don't want to > D> rely solely on the registry though, because of the limitations you > D> describe: [...] > > Cool. Also note the group could be wrong, e.g. someone modified a > Maildir spool externally and the registry doesn't know. So it's a bit > like asking a random person for directions: very nice when it works but > don't rely on it :) When the user notices that the registry is wrong he will be able revert to the file path method by calling the function with a prefix. I also noticed that when the same message is in two different groups the registry will only return the group where it first saw it, right? I guess it would be quite difficult to extend the registry in a way so that it can return all groups where a message exists? -David