On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 13:21:28 +1100, Stewart Smith <stew...@flamingspork.com>
wrote:
> What about this patch (just with those few things fixed)?
>
> diff --git a/notmuch-new.c b/notmuch-new.c
> index f25c71f..8303047 100644
> --- a/notmuch-new.c
> +++ b/notmuch-new.c
> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ typedef struct {
> int total_files;
> int processed_files;
> int added_messages;
> + int tag_maildir;
I think notmuch_bool_t will be better than int here.
BTW what is the reason for using notmuch_bool_t instead of bool from
stdbool.h?
> @@ -222,6 +277,7 @@ add_files_recursive (notmuch_database_t *notmuch,
> notmuch_filenames_t *db_subdirs = NULL;
> struct stat st;
> notmuch_bool_t is_maildir, new_directory;
> + int maildir_detected = -1;
Again, notmuch_bool_t is IMHO better. You seem only to use values -1 and
1 which is quite confusing.
>
> if (stat (path, &st)) {
> fprintf (stderr, "Error reading directory %s: %s\n",
> @@ -301,6 +357,28 @@ add_files_recursive (notmuch_database_t *notmuch,
> continue;
> }
>
> + /* If this directory is a Maildir folder, we need to
> + * ignore any subdirectories marked tmp/, and scan for
> + * Maildir attributes on messages contained in the sub-
> + * directories 'new' and 'cur'. */
> + if (maildir_detected != 0 &&
> + (entry->d_type == DT_DIR || entry->d_type == DT_UNKNOWN) &&
> + ((strcmp (entry->d_name, "tmp") == 0) ||
> + (strcmp (entry->d_name, "new") == 0) ||
> + (strcmp (entry->d_name, "cur") == 0))) {
> +
> + if (maildir_detected == -1) {
> + maildir_detected = _entries_resemble_maildir(fs_entries,
> num_fs_entries);
> + }
> + if (maildir_detected == 1) {
> + if (strcmp (entry->d_name, "tmp") == 0) {
> + continue;
> + } else {
> + state->tag_maildir = TRUE;
You might also want to set this to FALSE somewhere. It is very unlikely,
but somebody can create non-maildir under maildir.
> @@ -412,7 +490,12 @@ add_files_recursive (notmuch_database_t *notmuch,
> /* success */
> case NOTMUCH_STATUS_SUCCESS:
> state->added_messages++;
> - tag_inbox_and_unread (message);
> + if (state->tag_maildir) {
> + derive_tags_from_maildir_flags (message,
> + entry->d_name);
> + } else {
> + tag_inbox_and_unread (message);
> + }
> break;
> /* Non-fatal issues (go on to next file) */
> case NOTMUCH_STATUS_DUPLICATE_MESSAGE_ID:
You add the tags only to newly discovered mails. If a file is renamed
(e.g. because another mail reader removed the S flag), the tags will not
be updated. It is a question, what is the proper behavior. I personally
use something like what is in your patch and then use notmuchsync to
handle renamed files. It has only one problem - notmuchsync is quite
slow, so if this is solved in notmuch, I'd be happy.
Cheers,
Michal
_______________________________________________
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
