Re: [Evolution-hackers] If an account changes, who regenerates the services?

2010-10-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On 10/19/2010 03:52 PM, Matthew Barnes wrote: On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 14:10 -0500, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: I'm trying to unwind some code in Camel and in Evolution. The problem I have is that if you change an email account's extra options (e.g. imapx's apply filters to new messages),

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Inline PGP encoding in Enigmail

2010-07-03 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On 07/03/2010 08:28 PM, Kip Warner wrote: Greetings ladies and gentlemen. There is a thread currently going over in the Enigmail mailing list that draws on Evolution's design and the choice made to use PGP/MIME encoding, as opposed to inline, for sending.

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Raw access to message

2010-03-11 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On 03/11/2010 09:16 AM, Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus wrote: Hi, Is it possible to get raw access to an email (including header and body)? Or, if that is not possible, raw access to the body of the message? Raw access is important for me because I want to write a plugin which uses some kind

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Raw access to message

2010-03-11 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus wrote: On Do, 2010-03-11 at 10:45 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On 03/11/2010 09:16 AM, Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus wrote: Hi, Is it possible to get raw access to an email (including header and body)? Or, if that is not possible, raw access to the body

Re: [Evolution-hackers] gcc 4.4 may be causing a number of bugs in Evolution

2010-02-02 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Paul Smith wrote: On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 11:52 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: This weekend I discovered a particularly nasty bug in gcc 4.4 where gcc would mistakenly optimize out important sections of code when it encountered a particular trick used in a ton of places inside Evolution

Re: [Evolution-hackers] gcc 4.4 may be causing a number of bugs in Evolution

2010-02-02 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Xavier Bestel wrote: On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 18:13 +, Matthew Barnes wrote: On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 12:27 -0500, Paul Smith wrote: Anyway, I agree with you that if Evo makes use of this type of aliasing then we should definitely add that flag to the default makefile flags. Configure

Re: [Evolution-hackers] mail address validation

2010-01-21 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
That won't actually work (at least not very well). The Camel address decoding functions assume their input is supposed to be valid and so it will do whatever it has to do to make it work. It would have to be extremely broken for it to fail. What you'll probably have to do is write similar

Re: [Evolution-hackers] mail address validation

2010-01-21 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Tobias Mueller wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On 21.01.2010 19:57, Tobias Mueller wrote: I'd be delighted to see an implementation that parses all corner cases, i.e. foo/bar=...@example.com or !foo%bar?baz*...@example.com, correctly. That might be a

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Moving from the single mbox file format for the local folders

2009-12-17 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
chenthill wrote: On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 09:56 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On 12/15/2009 02:46 PM, Chenthill wrote: Hi fellow hackers!! I have been working for a while during last week on one the blockers in evolution - https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=550414

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Moving from the single mbox file format for the local folders

2009-12-16 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Matthew Barnes wrote: On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 09:56 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: This just means the proper LARGEFILE flags are not being used at compile time. Either EDS's configure isn't doing proper checks or else Evolution itself isn't doing proper checks and there is some sort

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Moving from the single mbox file format for the local folders

2009-12-16 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: Matthew Barnes wrote: there was concern that simply turning it on would somehow break existing installs. I'm fuzzy on the details, but vaguely recall it being about a field size in some binary file being dependent on sizeof(off_t), which would change

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Moving from the single mbox file format for the local folders

2009-12-16 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On 12/16/2009 02:40 PM, Milan Crha wrote: On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 11:35 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: The summary files would have had this problem, but they would have just been regenerated, so not really an issue. Hi, a) it's similar as moving from 32bit to 64bit

Re: [Evolution-hackers] A Camel API to get the filename of the cache, also a proposal to have one format to rule them all

2009-01-06 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: Hey Philip, [Im lagging in my mail-replies, still a lot to go, due to my 3 week vacation.] On Fri, 2009-01-02 at 13:25 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: Hi there evos, For an EPlugin that I'm working on I will need a Camel API to get the filename of the cache.

Re: [Evolution-hackers] A Camel API to get the filename of the cache, also a proposal to have one format to rule them all

2009-01-06 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Mon, 2009-01-05 at 08:25 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: migrating away from the IMAP specific data cache would be good. Yes. I think IMAP and the local providers are the only ones that are still using a specialized datacache. The IMAP4 one, for example

Re: [Evolution-hackers] camel-folder-summary.c - 64bit-ness ...

2009-01-06 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Michael Meeks wrote: Hi guys, I was just trying to reproduce some migration performance tests with my mbox and summary data rsync'd from a 32bit machine to a 64bit machine. Surprisingly this appears to crash immediately. that's not good :( Looking at the camel-file-utils.c

[Evolution-hackers] unsubscribing to evolution-mail-maintainers

2008-12-19 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Can anyone tell me how to go about getting unsubscribed from the evolution-mail-maintainers list? Thanks, Jeff ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers

Re: [Evolution-hackers] [CamelStore] clarifying of documentation becomes a minor change of code

2008-09-01 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Mon, 2008-09-01 at 18:19 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: [snip] void camel_store_free_folder_info (CamelStore *store, CamelFolderInfo *fi) { + if (!fi) + return; + that null-check should probably go after the g_return below: g_return_if_fail (CAMEL_IS_STORE (store));

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evolution: Taking forward...

2008-07-15 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
I just wanted to chime in and say AWESOME!!! :-) It is my hope that now that Evolution no longer requires assignment, that we'll see more developers get involved with improving it - who knows, maybe someone will even contribute an uber IMAP implementation? :-) Jeff (retired Evolution hacker) On

Re: [Evolution-hackers] cleaning up the timezone handling mess

2008-07-01 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
is anyone else getting duplicates of this message every few days? This has been going on for months and is a bit annoying. Is the mailing-list server looping or what? Jeff On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 19:45 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote: Hello, did the slightly inflammatory subject catch your

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Is there any APIs for fetching the GPG Key id from a CamelMimeMessage ?

2008-06-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
It doesn't look like there's any current API to do it. I suggest you look at gmime svn's gmime-cipher-context.[c,h] and gmime-gpg-context.[c,h], specifically the code that fills in the GMimeSigner structures and just make CamelCipherCertInfo struct closer to the GMimeSigner struct. Jeff On Wed,

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Review a patch?

2008-05-22 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Did you try your patch with any really long file names? Jeff On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 04:17 -0400, Michael B. Trausch wrote: On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 20:24 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: Fudging the linked list in camel is a gross hack (made worse by the fact that the MIME specification does

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Review a patch?

2008-05-22 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
. Trausch wrote: On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 20:24 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: Fudging the linked list in camel is a gross hack (made worse by the fact that the MIME specification does not dictate that the name param be last), this is why I suggested you do it in the composer by making it set

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Review a patch?

2008-05-21 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Fudging the linked list in camel is a gross hack (made worse by the fact that the MIME specification does not dictate that the name param be last), this is why I suggested you do it in the composer by making it set the name parameter last when constructing the headers. Jeff On Wed, 2008-05-21 at

[Evolution-hackers] Camel Provider/Getv/Setv

2008-05-16 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
I guess I've probably always been aware that there was some suckage here, but I never really knew how bad. So the other night I was trying to implement support for tweaking cache expiration preferences for IMAP4, but ran into some problems with providing a decent way of providing a UI for it.

Re: [Evolution-hackers] evolution build fails on em-folder-properties.c

2008-05-16 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
try rev 35503 On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 13:51 -0400, Reid Thompson wrote: ... AMEL_PROVIDERDIR=\\ -DPREFIX=\/opt/evo\ -DG_LOG_DOMAIN=\evolution-mail\ -ggdb -O2 -march=prescott -g -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wno-sign-compare -MT em-folder-properties.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/em-folder-properties.Tpo

[Evolution-hackers] mboxtool

2008-05-08 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
: 8 -*- */ /* * Authors: Jeffrey Stedfast [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Copyright 2008 Novell, Inc. (www.novell.com) * * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evolution doesnt recognise any mouse click events....PLZ HELP.......

2008-04-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
honestly your best bet is probably to ask the Gtk+ developers, not us. Jeff On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 20:57 +0530, svalbard colaco wrote: Hi all , just adding some more info to this... i get the followiing error [...] (evolution:3860): Gdk-DirectFB-WARNING **:

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Largefile support

2008-04-07 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 13:29 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 12:43 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:  The only 'gotcha' I can think of by enabling it by default is that it might break ABI if old builds were 32bit off_t's (the new off_t's would be 64bit). Oh, and fwiw

Re: [Evolution-hackers] SVN head build fails 'O_LARGEFILE' undeclared (first use in this function)

2008-04-07 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 16:22 -0400, Reid Thompson wrote: explicitly passing --disable-largefile still yields an error... should be fixed in rev 8626 Jeff ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Loading really large E-mails on devices with not enough Vm

2008-01-27 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 13:44 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: This is very strange, though. It looks like stream=0x0 but the mime-parser's stream ain't NULL. that just means the stream the parser is using is not a subclass of CamelSeekableSubstream Jeff

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Loading really large E-mails on devices with not enough Vm

2008-01-26 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Sat, 2008-01-26 at 13:44 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: This is what happens if you try to open a truly large E-mail on a device that has not as much memory available: Is there something we can do about this? Can we change the MIME parsing algorithm to be less memory demanding for example?

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Loading really large E-mails on devices with not enough Vm

2008-01-26 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Sat, 2008-01-26 at 22:12 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On Sat, 2008-01-26 at 13:44 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: This is what happens if you try to open a truly large E-mail on a device that has not as much memory available: Is there something we can do about this? Can we change

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Loading really large E-mails on devices with not enough Vm

2008-01-26 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
, but it does make things a little more difficult and possibly touchy. Jeff On Sat, 2008-01-26 at 22:48 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On Sat, 2008-01-26 at 22:12 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On Sat, 2008-01-26 at 13:44 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: This is what happens if you try to open

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Diary replaying on IMAP accounts

2008-01-21 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 13:17 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 10:48 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: This is why I started looking at dropping CamelDisco* and replacing all instances with CamelOffline* - tri-state is awful, dual-state is ftw. anyways, if your fix works

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Diary replaying on IMAP accounts

2008-01-19 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
This is why I started looking at dropping CamelDisco* and replacing all instances with CamelOffline* - tri-state is awful, dual-state is ftw. anyways, if your fix works, go for it. Jeff On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 15:13 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: Hi there, When we connect with an IMAP service

Re: [Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-27 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 08:46 +0800, jacky wrote: --- Jeffrey Stedfast [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 00:20 +0800, jacky wrote: It seem that your patch don't support this kind of encoded string: =?gb2312?b?any-encoded-text?==?gb2312?b?any-encoded-text?= Two

Re: [Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-27 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
(camel-mime-part.c:995) On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 08:25 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 08:46 +0800, jacky wrote: --- Jeffrey Stedfast [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 00:20 +0800, jacky wrote: It seem that your patch don't support this kind

Re: [Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-26 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
and I just tested it again (noticed that I didn't have a test case like this in my test suite so added one) and it works fine. Do you have an example subject/whatever header for me to test against? Jeff --- Jeffrey Stedfast [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: This patch is a port of my GMime rfc2047

Re: [Evolution-hackers] [patch] fixed incorrect rfc2047 decode for CJKheader

2007-12-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Tue, 2007-12-25 at 15:56 +0800, jacky wrote: But the problem describe below has not been solved. 1) An encoded-word was divided into two line. This was sent by dotProject v2.0.1 . As I seen this kind of email use quoted encode only, and header_decode_text() can get all encoded-words

Re: [Evolution-hackers] [patch] fixed incorrect rfc2047 decode for CJK header

2007-12-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
FWIW, even Thunderbird doesn't handle multi-byte characters split across multiple encoded-word tokens. I was just checking out their implementation in mozilla/netwerk/src/nsMIMEHeaderParamImpl.cpp:DecodeRFC2047Str() Jeff On Sun, 2007-12-23 at 23:09 +0800, jacky wrote: Hi, all. The rfc2047

[Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
This patch is a port of my GMime rfc2047 decoder which is even more liberal in what it accepts than Thunderbird and is what I will be committing to svn. closing bugs: #302991 #315513 #502178 Jeff Index: camel-mime-utils.c === ---

Re: [Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
started with the exact same port, but had to pause because of family visiting, I'm back home and you have it finished :). Thanks a lot! Brought it to tny's camel. FYI: http://tinymail.org/trac/tinymail/changeset/3203 On Tue, 2007-12-25 at 19:28 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: This patch

Re: [Evolution-hackers] [patch] fixed incorrect rfc2047 decode for CJK header

2007-12-24 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Hi Jacky, I've looked over your patch, but unfortunately it is unusable. The patch is riddled with buffer overflows and incorrect logic. What types of bugs are you actually trying to fix? What is it about CJK messages in particular that are not getting decoded properly? Your email was overly

Re: [Evolution-hackers] More on message state

2007-12-02 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
$Label[1-5] are the same user-flag names that Thunderbird uses for those colours Flag-for-followup is a copy of the Outlook feature and likely cannot be simply mapped to some ToDo flag (never even heard of that flag). Internally, these are represented in the CamelTag list on the

Re: [Evolution-hackers] How does evo find its components? (switching installs of evo)

2007-10-29 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Mon, 2007-10-29 at 15:45 -0400, Paul Smith wrote: On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 16:37:06 -0700, Matthew Barnes wrote: On Fri, 2007-10-12 at 13:17 -0400, Paul Smith wrote: How does Evolution decide where to get e-d-s, plugins, etc.? How can I reset it to run the ones in /usr/bin and ignore the

Re: [Evolution-hackers] read email in an easier way by adding some accelerated keys

2007-10-26 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Personally I find your choice of ordering of J/K and S/D odd for next/prev, seems to me they should be flipped. Also, your gtk_paned_size == 55 is unlikely to work for everyone The other problem is that those key bindings are hardly self-explanatory/discoverable :( Jeff On Fri, 2007-10-26 at

Re: [Evolution-hackers] GMail IMAP support in Evolution

2007-10-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
One thing you could do which would be of use would be to sniff the packets that Outlook sends to Google Mail's IMAP and log them for the Evolution developers to read so that perhaps they can see what queries Outlook is doing that is so much faster than what Evolution is doing and maybe try to

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Let the porting begin

2007-10-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 03:25 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 11:58 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: I took a look at the IDLE implementation last night and felt it went about it the wrong way. Yes, you are right. I think the right fix is to create a new API called

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Let the porting begin

2007-10-24 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
I took a look at the IDLE implementation last night and felt it went about it the wrong way. Firstly, the added camel_stream_[read,write]_nb() and camel_stream_read_idle() functionality is totally unnecessary and just makes the camel stream API gross (not to mention duplicating a lot of code as

Re: [Evolution-hackers] There's no need to be so hard on iconv

2007-10-11 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2007-10-11 at 17:14 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Thu, 2007-10-11 at 10:52 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: I have far better fixes in GMime that need to be ported to Camel. Porting GMime to Camel would be an interesting effort indeed. Perhaps just replacing CamelMimePart

Re: [Evolution-hackers] There's no need to be so hard on iconv

2007-10-11 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2007-10-11 at 19:49 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Thu, 2007-10-11 at 13:10 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On Thu, 2007-10-11 at 17:14 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Thu, 2007-10-11 at 10:52 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: I have far better fixes in GMime that need

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Copyright of Camel's individual source files

2007-10-09 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
It was supposed to be GPLv2 or LGPLv2 (forget which), but without the or later clause. Jeff On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 16:19 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: Philip, This is observed in Evolution also. The OpenChange hackers brought to our notice and I'm with the Novell legal team to get this

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Copyright of Camel's individual source files

2007-10-09 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
(been having problems with the novell smtp server sending mail, so apologies if this goes out twice). On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 17:22 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 10:48 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: It was supposed to be GPLv2 or LGPLv2 (forget which), but without

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Copyright of Camel's individual source files

2007-10-09 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 13:33 -0300, standel wrote: On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 17:22 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 10:48 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: It was supposed to be GPLv2 or LGPLv2 (forget which), but without the or later clause. For what it's worth

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Copyright of Camel's individual source files

2007-10-09 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 13:33 -0300, standel wrote: On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 17:22 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 10:48 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: It was supposed to be GPLv2 or LGPLv2 (forget which), but without the or later clause. For what it's worth

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Let's clean up dead files in Subversion trunk

2007-09-21 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
I probably wouldn't get rid of mail/README.async, that's useful knowledge in there iirc. Jeff On Thu, 2007-09-20 at 15:14 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: With GNOME 2.22 development just now getting under way, this seems like a good time for some fall cleaning. There's quite a few files still

Re: [Evolution-hackers] EDS: Trying to implement expunge function in camel-spool-folder.c

2007-06-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Sun, 2007-06-24 at 23:24 +0100, Seb James wrote: [snip] All I'm trying to do to start with is get a message to print out on stdout. In the function camel_spool_folder_class_init() I create a CamelFolderClass pointer to the CamelSpoolFolderClass passed in, so that I can then replace the

Re: [Evolution-hackers] EDS: Trying to implement expunge function in camel-spool-folder.c

2007-06-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Mon, 2007-06-25 at 23:05 +0100, Seb James wrote: On Mon, 2007-06-25 at 14:25 +0100, Seb James wrote: Hi Jeffrey, On Mon, 2007-06-25 at 08:59 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On Sun, 2007-06-24 at 23:24 +0100, Seb James wrote: [snip] from your description, it sounds like you tried

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions

2007-06-11 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 09:46 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: I'm preserving the exchange for context; my responses are sprinkled below. On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 23:47 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 15:55 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 20:22 -0400, Jeffrey

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Camel Data Cache mechanism

2007-06-11 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 15:27 -0300, Sebastien Tandel wrote: Hi, I am looking at the way CAMEL is working and have some questions about the cache implementation. First, let's see if I've understood the mechanism basics (and, of course, don't hesitate to correct me if I'm wrong :))

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions

2007-06-10 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 11:39 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 08:14 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: server says: * 1 EXPUNGE camel-imap-summary does: g_ptr_array_remove_index (messages, seqid - 1); In imap_rescan, for example in case a message got removed

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions

2007-06-09 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 13:00 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote: What I disliked most about Camel's 'imap' code, though, is the fact that the sequences have to correspond to the array indexes of the CamelFolderSummary. It sounds like it would have been more easy if that was a key in a hashtable.

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions

2007-06-08 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 14:39 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 09:25 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 10:56 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote: The best way is to ask for the ENVELOPE and the remaining info using the normal BODY.PEEK method. Have

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions

2007-06-08 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 12:23 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 09:25 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: it's not possible to do better w/o dropping features like message threading. In fact, the above minimalizing of header fetching already breaks the quick context-menu vfolder

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions

2007-06-08 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 15:13 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 17:11 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 12:23 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 09:25 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: it's not possible to do better w/o dropping features like

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions

2007-06-08 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 16:02 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 18:27 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 15:13 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 17:11 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 12:23 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions

2007-06-07 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 10:56 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 08:25 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: Le jeudi 07 juin 2007 à 01:53 +0300, Philip Van Hoof a écrit : Without immediately writing to disk work, the download by itself will consume around 120 MB of RAM, and

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions

2007-05-31 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: Hi. I've been getting into the code of evolution recently, and am thinking of doing a bit more to see if I can get it working OK for my situation. I have an IMAP mailbox which is very large, both in terms of folders (over 100) and

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions

2007-05-31 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 13:38 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 16:10 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: What version to start with? I'm on Debian GNU/Linux, which currently has evo 2.6. I notice that's a bit dated

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introduction and Questions

2007-05-31 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 11:38 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 14:10 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote: Hi. I've been getting into the code of evolution recently, and am thinking of doing a bit more to see if I can get

Re: [Evolution-hackers] X-Evolution: UUUUUUUU-FFFF - flags?

2007-05-29 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 17:04 +1000, Philip Rhoades wrote: [snip] A 4 character hexdecimal value which represents the flags of the message. A typical example might be: X-Evolution: 002-0002 This message is message number 2, and it is marked DELETED (CAMEL_MESSAGE_DELETED =

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Proposed fix for bug 311512

2007-04-26 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 07:50 +0100, Karl Relton wrote: On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 09:48 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: I'm not sure I'd call it get_filter_thread() because it's not getting a thread, all it is really doing is getting you a 'wait' id (and ugh, the new session_thread_wait() just

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Proposed fix for bug 311512

2007-04-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
I'm not sure I'd call it get_filter_thread() because it's not getting a thread, all it is really doing is getting you a 'wait' id (and ugh, the new session_thread_wait() just busy-waits?) I think if this type of solution is really the best way of doing it, then I think it'd be better to just have

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Why a bitfield in CamelOfflineFolder?

2006-11-30 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
; gboolean sync_offline; }; ?? -- Jeffrey Stedfast Desktop Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Why a bitfield in CamelOfflineFolder?

2006-11-30 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
wow, that came out totally wrong... using a single bit allows us to extend the structure with more bitfields w/o breaking ABI if we find we need to. it's akin to having: unsigned int sync_offline:1; unsigned int unused:31; On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 11:41 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: the idea

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Why a bitfield in CamelOfflineFolder?

2006-11-30 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 12:08 -0500, Matthew Barnes wrote: On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 11:51 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: wow, that came out totally wrong... using a single bit allows us to extend the structure with more bitfields w/o breaking ABI if we find we need to. it's akin

Re: [Evolution-hackers] GStringChunk - not all it's cracked up to be.

2006-11-06 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 20:00 +, Ross Burton wrote: On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 14:26 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: With these new patches coming in pushing the idea of moving to a GStringChunk here and there, at first it all sounds well and good, but then I looked at the source code

Re: [Evolution-hackers] [PATCH 3/3] Add some missing includes

2006-08-15 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com ___ Evolution

Re: [Evolution-hackers] [PATCH 3/3] Add some missing includes

2006-08-15 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Zucchi did timings a while back and found it to be worth it *shrug* I don't have the timings on me tho, so I have no idea what kind of difference it made. On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 15:20 +, Tor Lillqvist wrote: ti 2006-08-15 klockan 10:18 -0400 skrev Jeffrey Stedfast: the original idea

Re: [Evolution-hackers] How to change the accountname?

2006-08-14 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
for it? (auto fill in) Any help would be appreciated. Kind regards, Serjan Pruis ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker

[Evolution-hackers] mmap patch

2006-07-19 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
. -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com ? camel-gpg-context.c.gpg ? camel-mime-tables.c ? camel_folder_summary_with_mmap_fixes11.txt ? const-charset-map.patch ? mmap.patch ? pgp-filter.patch ? pstring.patch ? providers/imap4/272058.patch ? providers/imap4

Re: [Evolution-hackers] The fixes11 mmap patch doesn't respect data alignment on some architectures

2006-07-14 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
don't have a lot experience in this field. -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers

Re: [Evolution-hackers] [evolution-patches] Avoiding a strdup in camel-folder-summar.c

2006-07-12 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
; i tokens_len; i ++) if (tokens[i] == token) break; no, because you'd segfault trying to g_free() a static string. The point of the code Toshok wrote was to no-op if the string was static and to g_free() it if not. Jeff -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Camel mmap summary ideas, proposal for a meeting

2006-07-12 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
as a real solution (and not just a hack), we'd have to redesign the summary files to group all the string data together to try and keep strings in contiguous pages to keep page swapping to a minimum. The current file layout is terribly inefficient for this. -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Camel mmap summary ideas, proposal for a meeting

2006-07-12 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 20:05 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 13:34 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: [snip] It also seems to me that if we were really going to be serious about using mmap as a real solution (and not just a hack), we'd have to redesign the summary files

Re: [Evolution-hackers] [evolution-patches] Fix for agressive memory segmentation

2006-07-06 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
/listinfo/evolution-patches -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com ? 340717.patch ? camel-mime-tables.c ? pstring.patch ? providers/imap/camel-imap-private.h ? providers/local/mbox-repair.patch ? providers/smtp/336035.patch Index: ChangeLog

Re: [Evolution-hackers] [evolution-patches] Fix for agressive memory segmentation

2006-07-06 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 21:32 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 15:18 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: For some strange reason I thought the pstring stuff already did that, oops. I guess I was thinking of similar code I wrote a few years back for another project

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Something screwy when Evolution Shell invokes bonobo_activation_active_server_unregister()

2006-06-19 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Something screwy when Evolution Shell invokes bonobo_activation_active_server_unregister()

2006-06-19 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
ah, okay. Jeff On Mon, 2006-06-19 at 17:03 +0300, Tor Lillqvist wrote: må 2006-06-19 klockan 09:48 -0400 skrev Jeffrey Stedfast: Is there a ::destroy() method on the EShell object (like GtkWidgets)? Perhaps it would be better to unregister there rather than in an idle cb? My concern

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Help request: Mime v1.0 from char* to CamelMimeMessage*

2006-06-09 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
\n, camel_data_wrapper_get_mime_type(dw)); } ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Fill a store with messages

2006-05-09 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Stores don't contain messages, only Folders do. See the CamelFolderSummary class for that. Jeff On Tue, 2006-05-09 at 23:27 +0200, Smartuser wrote: Hello i'm kind of new in here and i've a question. About the stores. I've mannaged to create a new provider in

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Should I unref a CamelDataWrapper when I got it from camel_medium_get_content_object()?

2006-03-20 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http

Re: [Evolution-hackers] g_mutex, e_mutex and pthread_mutex in camel?!

2006-03-13 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
in ?? () #3 0xb7a3d653 in write_to_stream (data_wrapper=0x8067aa8, stream=0x8067c58) at camel-data-wrapper.c:149 #4 0xb7a3d6d7 in camel_data_wrapper_write_to_stream (data_wrapper=0x8067aa8, stream=0x8067a38) at camel-data-wrapper.c:175 -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL

[Evolution-hackers] Re: [evolution-patches] [Mailer] Possible fix for #333213

2006-03-06 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Sat, 2006-03-04 at 19:03 +0800, simon.zheng wrote: Hi Jeffrey and all, On Fri, 2006-03-03 at 10:00 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: The patch is bad because callers of e_iconv() expect errno to be set on -1 and your patch breaks that guarantee. Yeah, you're right.:) Instead

Re: [Evolution-hackers] ... and how camel should be

2006-02-14 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
work. Hint: They are NOT message-ids nor are the sequence-ids. -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo

Re: [Evolution-hackers] ... and how camel should be

2006-02-14 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Have fun implementing this on your own. I guess you don't need my help. On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 19:03 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 11:06 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: Even for single-user, disk-summary-branch was slower than the current in-memory implementation

Re: [Evolution-hackers] ... and how camel should be

2006-02-14 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
. Is it still not worth fixing? I strongly disagree. -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution

Re: [Evolution-hackers] CamelStore.get_folder() with no folder name

2006-01-04 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
, , 0, ex); What am I expected to return here? Thanks, jules ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Logic flaw in header_decode_lwsp()

2005-12-02 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
this way on purpose. indeed, and while I was fixing that logic problem I also removed the '\0' check since it isn't needed in any way (if it is lwsp or '(' then it can't be \0) -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com Index: ChangeLog

Re: [Evolution-hackers] camel_header_unfold()

2005-11-29 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 09:55 +0100, Jules Colding wrote: On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 12:12 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: I see what you are thinking, but by the time this code is run on any input, the \r has already been stripped and you cannot, by definition, have \n\n in a header (it terminates

  1   2   >