Synchronization success stories?

2014-04-13 Thread Tilmann Singer
David Mazieres  writes:
> What happens if you get a message that's been stuck in a queue for a few
> days and has an old Date: header?

It would be missed.  I have set the timespan to look backwards for new
mail to one month to be a bit safer against the stuck-in-queue cases,
but mails with older Date: headers would definitely get missed.

The current output of notmuch count "*" is the same on both the client
and the server, so it seems I didn't run into this problem yet (maybe I
was just lucky).

> Or if you get new messages that have
> the same Message-ID as old ones?

Is that even possible?  I thought that notmuch guarantees the uniqueness
of indexed message ids.  The only reference I could find without trying
to read the code was this thread id:87mwyz3s9d.fsf at star.eba from 2012,
which supports the assumption.

>> Synchronization of the notmuch tags database is only necessary when I
>> switch between different client computers, which happens less
>> frequently.
>
> Do you use a laptop everywhere?  I've found that for switching between
> my desktop machine at home, my laptop on the train, and my desktop at
> work (which amounts to five switches a day), the notmuch dump time is
> painfully slow--like well over 10 seconds for 100,000 messages.  Hook
> that into notmuch-poll and you have a recipe for hanging emacs every
> time you type "G".

I have one laptop and one desktop and switch between them almost daily,
and run a hibernate script that does notmuch dump + git push, and a
resume script that does git pull + notmuch restore.  For hibernate /
resume the speed of those operations is acceptable, but I wouldn't want
to incur that wait for every time checking for new mail.

Here is how long they take (on a machine with an SSD, which certainly
helps):

$ time notmuch dump --format=batch-tag | sort > /tmp/notmuch.dump
real0m3.643s
user0m3.593s
sys 0m0.140s
$ time notmuch restore < /tmp/notmuch.dump
real0m3.719s
user0m3.357s
sys 0m0.357s
$ notmuch count 
117118



Til
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 489 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20140413/3ae1dfe0/attachment.pgp>


[PATCH] emacs: process crypto for reply only when specified

2014-04-13 Thread David Bremner
Tomi Ollila  writes:

>
> Well, I set notmuch-crypto-process-mime to nil -- it still wants to
> sign the message and runs gpg...
>

Was it nil when you replied, i.e. when the mml tags were created?

d


[PATCH] emacs: process crypto for reply only when specified

2014-04-13 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Sun, Apr 13 2014, Tomi Ollila  wrote:
>> Perhaps people with no ability to sign are less likely to have
>> "notmuch-crypto-process-mime" set?  Or we can add another configuration
>> variable initialized from notmuch-crypto-process-mime, but allowing
>> people to shut this off.
>
> Well, I set notmuch-crypto-process-mime to nil -- it still wants to
> sign the message and runs gpg...

Was my followup patch applied?  My patch controls the insertion of the
mml tag depending on whether or not notmuch-crypto-process-mime is t or
not.  If notmuch-crypto-process-mime is nil the tag won't be added.
Presumably you either did not have that patch applied, or had manually
set it to t?

In any event, if the mml tag is present, it's no longer in notmuch's
hands; emacs's mail processing is handling things and calling gpg-agent
to sign/encrypt the message.

Can you clarify what exactly your situation was?

Presumably people who have not set up any crypto processing should not
have notmuch-crypto-process-mime set t.

jamie.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 818 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20140413/d5f75bda/attachment.pgp>


[PATCH] emacs: process crypto for reply only when specified

2014-04-13 Thread Tomi Ollila
On Sun, Apr 13 2014, David Bremner  wrote:

> Jameson Graef Rollins  writes:
>
>> This is a tweak to patch "emacs: sign/encrypt replies to
>> signed/encrypted messages" to only add mml crypto flags for replys
>> when crypto processing has been activated.
>>
>
> The (merged) patch seems straightforward and seems to work. I'll
> probably push it tomorrow if nobody complains.

Code looks OK. +1. I'm interested to see whether replies to signed emails
work on this system where sign/(de|en)cryption just doesn't work (out of
the box) :D

> d

Tomi


Synchronization success stories?

2014-04-13 Thread Tilmann Singer
I have experimented with offlineimap, syncmaildir and rsync.  The
append-only approach of notmuch makes synchronization of the mail corpus
simpler, so there are lots of options.  With ssh access to the server, I
found rsync to be conceptually the simplest, but it turned out to be too
slow for me (with ~110k mails) when frequently checking for new mails.

What I have settled with is a hacked together ruby script that uses the
notmuch command line both on the server and on the client to determine
unsynced mails, and then runs rsync explicitely for the necessary files.

The notmuch index on the server is only used to find new files for this
synchronization process, and is different from the notmuch indexes I
have on my client machines.

A prerequisite for this is of course ssh access and the ability to set
up notmuch on the server.

The steps performed on a sync run are roughly like this:

- local: notmuch new
- local: notmuch search --output=messages ..
- remote: notmuch new
- remote: notmuch search --output=messages ..
- compare search results
- run rsync for mails that only exist locally
  (using notmuch search --output=files to get the filenames)
- run rsync for mails that only exist remotely
  (using notmuch search --output=files to get the filenames)

With a reused ssh connection this is sufficiently fast for me (<2s).  If
there is interest I can clean up the script of hardcoded paths etc. and
put it on github.

Synchronization of the notmuch tags database is only necessary when I
switch between different client computers, which happens less
frequently. Like David I have a dump file committed to git for that. I
found it useful to sort the output before adding it to git, to avoid
huge unreadable diffs:

notmuch dump --format=batch-tag | sort > /path/to/notmuch.dump


Til
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 489 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20140413/69158c4d/attachment.pgp>


Synchronization success stories?

2014-04-13 Thread dm-list-email-notm...@scs.stanford.edu
Tilmann Singer  writes:

> David Mazieres  writes:
>> What happens if you get a message that's been stuck in a queue for a few
>> days and has an old Date: header?
>
> It would be missed.  I have set the timespan to look backwards for new
> mail to one month to be a bit safer against the stuck-in-queue cases,
> but mails with older Date: headers would definitely get missed.
>
> The current output of notmuch count "*" is the same on both the client
> and the server, so it seems I didn't run into this problem yet (maybe I
> was just lucky).

I've been playing around with reorganizing my maildir, and found a
couple of messages (on mailing lists) with clearly invalid dates years
in the past.  But checking with notmuch count is a good idea.  Then you
can always fall back to the slow path in the unlikely event that your
counts don't match up.  Well, except that A) count is just unique
message-IDs, not messages, and B) when synchronizing in both directions
you could still miss something.  You have to assume that the invalid
dates are only ever going to occur at one end of a synchronization
event.

>> Or if you get new messages that have
>> the same Message-ID as old ones?
>
> Is that even possible?  I thought that notmuch guarantees the uniqueness
> of indexed message ids.  The only reference I could find without trying
> to read the code was this thread id:87mwyz3s9d.fsf at star.eba from 2012,
> which supports the assumption.

Sadly, yes it is quite possible, and even opens up a slight security
issue.  Suppose I know you are on a mailing list, and some message
appears on that mailing list that I don't want you to see.  I can send
you an innocuous-looking message that just happens to have the same
message-id, and you may never see the original mailing list message.
Even better, depending on how your spam filtering is setup, if I include
the GTUBE string in my message you may never see mine or the original.

That's why with muchsync, I replicate actual mail messages, rather than
message-IDs.  Then you can always periodically check for message-IDs
that appear in more than one file.  (In fact, thought I haven't
published an interface for this, the SQL database kept my muchsync makes
it trivial to check for this and detect certain attacks.)

I understand why notmuch went with message IDs.  For instance you have
sent this reply both directly to me and to a mailing list I am
subscribed to.  So I will get two slightly different copies of the
message (one will have the standard notmuch mailing list signature, the
other won't).  And this way once I've marked it read, the message will
be read even once the second copy comes in.  But personally I'd rather
see the occasional duplicate message than risk not seeing messages.  In
particular, if the goal is to see fewer unread messages, some sort of
feature that pro-actively skips all future messages in a thread or
subthread would be more useful...

> Here is how long they take (on a machine with an SSD, which certainly
> helps):
>
> $ time notmuch dump --format=batch-tag | sort > /tmp/notmuch.dump
> real0m3.643s
> user0m3.593s
> sys 0m0.140s
> $ time notmuch restore < /tmp/notmuch.dump
> real0m3.719s
> user0m3.357s
> sys 0m0.357s
> $ notmuch count 
> 117118

That's crazy.  I'm jealous.  Then again, this is how fast muchsync runs
(including a full database scan to detect changed messages and tags)
when there is no new mail:

$ time ./muchsync -v
[notmuch] No new mail.
synchronizing muchsync database with Xapian... 0.038506 (+0.038506)
starting scan of Xapian database... 0.039069 (+0.000563)
opened Xapian... 0.040851 (+0.001782)
scanned message IDs... 0.137647 (+0.096796)
scanned tags... 0.170404 (+0.032757)
scanned directories in xapian... 0.172100 (+0.001696)
scanned filenames in xapian... 0.172376 (+0.000276)
adjusted link counts... 0.199461 (+0.027085)
finished synchronizing muchsync database with Xapian... 0.212965 (+0.013505)

real0m0.220s
user0m0.173s
sys 0m0.023s

David


[PATCH] emacs: process crypto for reply only when specified

2014-04-13 Thread David Bremner
Tomi Ollila  writes:

>
> Code looks OK. +1. I'm interested to see whether replies to signed emails
> work on this system where sign/(de|en)cryption just doesn't work (out of
> the box) :D
>

It's a good point. I need to insert my smartcard to sign things, which
I'm sometimes too lazy to do. In my case, maybe I should stop being so
lazy; I suspect my particular case is a but unusual.

Perhaps people with no ability to sign are less likely to have
"notmuch-crypto-process-mime" set?  Or we can add another configuration
variable initialized from notmuch-crypto-process-mime, but allowing
people to shut this off.


Synchronization success stories?

2014-04-13 Thread David Bremner
Tilmann Singer  writes:

>
> With a reused ssh connection this is sufficiently fast for me (<2s).  If
> there is interest I can clean up the script of hardcoded paths etc. and
> put it on github.

Sure, sounds at least as good as what I am using. Also, syncmaildir
recently did something pretty annoying for upward compatibility, so in
the long term I'm interested in alternatives.

Maybe we should start a notmuchmail.org wiki page with the various
solutions on it.

> Synchronization of the notmuch tags database is only necessary when I
> switch between different client computers, which happens less
> frequently. Like David I have a dump file committed to git for that. I
> found it useful to sort the output before adding it to git, to avoid
> huge unreadable diffs:
>
> notmuch dump --format=batch-tag | sort > /path/to/notmuch.dump

same here.


[PATCH] test: use test_expect_equal for PATH test, update message

2014-04-13 Thread David Bremner
- The old test was quite impossible to debug; the new one shows the difference
  between the two directories, if any.

- "repository" doesn't make sense for out of tree builds. Or tarball
  builds, for that matter.
---

I was tracking down a weird issue with out of tree builds. I didn't
find the issue (it may have just been cruft from a previously broken
build). In any case, I think the patch is a small improvement.

 test/T000-basic.sh | 7 ---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/test/T000-basic.sh b/test/T000-basic.sh
index 9c94b62..ebbb6d2 100755
--- a/test/T000-basic.sh
+++ b/test/T000-basic.sh
@@ -86,8 +86,9 @@ test_expect_success \
 'NOTMUCH_CONFIG is set and points to an existing file' \
 'test -f "${NOTMUCH_CONFIG}"'

-test_expect_success \
-'PATH is set to this repository' \
-'test "`echo $PATH|cut -f1 -d: | sed -e 's,/test/valgrind/bin$,,'`" = 
"`dirname ${TEST_DIRECTORY}`"'
+test_begin_subtest 'PATH is set to build directory'
+test_expect_equal \
+"$(dirname ${TEST_DIRECTORY})" \
+"$(echo $PATH|cut -f1 -d: | sed -e 's,/test/valgrind/bin$,,')"

 test_done
-- 
1.9.1



Synchronization success stories?

2014-04-13 Thread David Mazieres
Tilmann Singer  writes:

> The steps performed on a sync run are roughly like this:
>
> - local: notmuch new
> - local: notmuch search --output=messages ..
> - remote: notmuch new
> - remote: notmuch search --output=messages ..
> - compare search results
> - run rsync for mails that only exist locally
>   (using notmuch search --output=files to get the filenames)
> - run rsync for mails that only exist remotely
>   (using notmuch search --output=files to get the filenames)

What happens if you get a message that's been stuck in a queue for a few
days and has an old Date: header?  Or if you get new messages that have
the same Message-ID as old ones?

> Synchronization of the notmuch tags database is only necessary when I
> switch between different client computers, which happens less
> frequently.

Do you use a laptop everywhere?  I've found that for switching between
my desktop machine at home, my laptop on the train, and my desktop at
work (which amounts to five switches a day), the notmuch dump time is
painfully slow--like well over 10 seconds for 100,000 messages.  Hook
that into notmuch-poll and you have a recipe for hanging emacs every
time you type "G".

Of course, I'm also experiencing the problem of "notmuch new" itself
being painfully slow, but at least that's now my bottleneck in switching
machines.  I suspect the source of the notmuch new problem is that I
have some huge, huge mailboxes.  Some of my maildir/cur directories are
multiple megabytes on a BSD FFS file system (no hashing, so linear
filename lookups in something that doesn't fit in the dcache).  On linux
ext4 things are much faster.  I intend to reorganize my maildir so that
there is a top-level directory with the year and hence no single
directory ever contains mail from more than one year.

David


Re: [PATCH] emacs: process crypto for reply only when specified

2014-04-13 Thread Tomi Ollila
On Sun, Apr 13 2014, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote:

 Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net writes:

 This is a tweak to patch emacs: sign/encrypt replies to
 signed/encrypted messages to only add mml crypto flags for replys
 when crypto processing has been activated.


 The (merged) patch seems straightforward and seems to work. I'll
 probably push it tomorrow if nobody complains.

Code looks OK. +1. I'm interested to see whether replies to signed emails
work on this system where sign/(de|en)cryption just doesn't work (out of
the box) :D

 d

Tomi
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: Synchronization success stories?

2014-04-13 Thread Tilmann Singer
I have experimented with offlineimap, syncmaildir and rsync.  The
append-only approach of notmuch makes synchronization of the mail corpus
simpler, so there are lots of options.  With ssh access to the server, I
found rsync to be conceptually the simplest, but it turned out to be too
slow for me (with ~110k mails) when frequently checking for new mails.

What I have settled with is a hacked together ruby script that uses the
notmuch command line both on the server and on the client to determine
unsynced mails, and then runs rsync explicitely for the necessary files.

The notmuch index on the server is only used to find new files for this
synchronization process, and is different from the notmuch indexes I
have on my client machines.

A prerequisite for this is of course ssh access and the ability to set
up notmuch on the server.

The steps performed on a sync run are roughly like this:

- local: notmuch new
- local: notmuch search --output=messages some time ago..now
- remote: notmuch new
- remote: notmuch search --output=messages some time ago..now
- compare search results
- run rsync for mails that only exist locally
  (using notmuch search --output=files to get the filenames)
- run rsync for mails that only exist remotely
  (using notmuch search --output=files to get the filenames)

With a reused ssh connection this is sufficiently fast for me (2s).  If
there is interest I can clean up the script of hardcoded paths etc. and
put it on github.

Synchronization of the notmuch tags database is only necessary when I
switch between different client computers, which happens less
frequently. Like David I have a dump file committed to git for that. I
found it useful to sort the output before adding it to git, to avoid
huge unreadable diffs:

notmuch dump --format=batch-tag | sort  /path/to/notmuch.dump


Til


pgpkJPsZdB3wk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


[PATCH] test: use test_expect_equal for PATH test, update message

2014-04-13 Thread David Bremner
- The old test was quite impossible to debug; the new one shows the difference
  between the two directories, if any.

- repository doesn't make sense for out of tree builds. Or tarball
  builds, for that matter.
---

I was tracking down a weird issue with out of tree builds. I didn't
find the issue (it may have just been cruft from a previously broken
build). In any case, I think the patch is a small improvement.

 test/T000-basic.sh | 7 ---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/test/T000-basic.sh b/test/T000-basic.sh
index 9c94b62..ebbb6d2 100755
--- a/test/T000-basic.sh
+++ b/test/T000-basic.sh
@@ -86,8 +86,9 @@ test_expect_success \
 'NOTMUCH_CONFIG is set and points to an existing file' \
 'test -f ${NOTMUCH_CONFIG}'
 
-test_expect_success \
-'PATH is set to this repository' \
-'test `echo $PATH|cut -f1 -d: | sed -e 's,/test/valgrind/bin$,,'` = 
`dirname ${TEST_DIRECTORY}`'
+test_begin_subtest 'PATH is set to build directory'
+test_expect_equal \
+$(dirname ${TEST_DIRECTORY}) \
+$(echo $PATH|cut -f1 -d: | sed -e 's,/test/valgrind/bin$,,')
 
 test_done
-- 
1.9.1

___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: [PATCH] test: use test_expect_equal for PATH test, update message

2014-04-13 Thread Tomi Ollila
On Sun, Apr 13 2014, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote:

 - The old test was quite impossible to debug; the new one shows the difference
   between the two directories, if any.

 - repository doesn't make sense for out of tree builds. Or tarball
   builds, for that matter.
 ---

Looks better than the old one. +1

Tomi



 I was tracking down a weird issue with out of tree builds. I didn't
 find the issue (it may have just been cruft from a previously broken
 build). In any case, I think the patch is a small improvement.

  test/T000-basic.sh | 7 ---
  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

 diff --git a/test/T000-basic.sh b/test/T000-basic.sh
 index 9c94b62..ebbb6d2 100755
 --- a/test/T000-basic.sh
 +++ b/test/T000-basic.sh
 @@ -86,8 +86,9 @@ test_expect_success \
  'NOTMUCH_CONFIG is set and points to an existing file' \
  'test -f ${NOTMUCH_CONFIG}'
  
 -test_expect_success \
 -'PATH is set to this repository' \
 -'test `echo $PATH|cut -f1 -d: | sed -e 's,/test/valgrind/bin$,,'` = 
 `dirname ${TEST_DIRECTORY}`'
 +test_begin_subtest 'PATH is set to build directory'
 +test_expect_equal \
 +$(dirname ${TEST_DIRECTORY}) \
 +$(echo $PATH|cut -f1 -d: | sed -e 's,/test/valgrind/bin$,,')
  
  test_done
 -- 
 1.9.1

 ___
 notmuch mailing list
 notmuch@notmuchmail.org
 http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: Synchronization success stories?

2014-04-13 Thread David Bremner
Tilmann Singer t...@tils.net writes:


 With a reused ssh connection this is sufficiently fast for me (2s).  If
 there is interest I can clean up the script of hardcoded paths etc. and
 put it on github.

Sure, sounds at least as good as what I am using. Also, syncmaildir
recently did something pretty annoying for upward compatibility, so in
the long term I'm interested in alternatives.

Maybe we should start a notmuchmail.org wiki page with the various
solutions on it.

 Synchronization of the notmuch tags database is only necessary when I
 switch between different client computers, which happens less
 frequently. Like David I have a dump file committed to git for that. I
 found it useful to sort the output before adding it to git, to avoid
 huge unreadable diffs:

 notmuch dump --format=batch-tag | sort  /path/to/notmuch.dump

same here.
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: Synchronization success stories?

2014-04-13 Thread David Mazieres
Tilmann Singer t...@tils.net writes:

 The steps performed on a sync run are roughly like this:

 - local: notmuch new
 - local: notmuch search --output=messages some time ago..now
 - remote: notmuch new
 - remote: notmuch search --output=messages some time ago..now
 - compare search results
 - run rsync for mails that only exist locally
   (using notmuch search --output=files to get the filenames)
 - run rsync for mails that only exist remotely
   (using notmuch search --output=files to get the filenames)

What happens if you get a message that's been stuck in a queue for a few
days and has an old Date: header?  Or if you get new messages that have
the same Message-ID as old ones?

 Synchronization of the notmuch tags database is only necessary when I
 switch between different client computers, which happens less
 frequently.

Do you use a laptop everywhere?  I've found that for switching between
my desktop machine at home, my laptop on the train, and my desktop at
work (which amounts to five switches a day), the notmuch dump time is
painfully slow--like well over 10 seconds for 100,000 messages.  Hook
that into notmuch-poll and you have a recipe for hanging emacs every
time you type G.

Of course, I'm also experiencing the problem of notmuch new itself
being painfully slow, but at least that's now my bottleneck in switching
machines.  I suspect the source of the notmuch new problem is that I
have some huge, huge mailboxes.  Some of my maildir/cur directories are
multiple megabytes on a BSD FFS file system (no hashing, so linear
filename lookups in something that doesn't fit in the dcache).  On linux
ext4 things are much faster.  I intend to reorganize my maildir so that
there is a top-level directory with the year and hence no single
directory ever contains mail from more than one year.

David
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: Synchronization success stories?

2014-04-13 Thread Tilmann Singer
David Mazieres dm-list-email-notm...@scs.stanford.edu writes:
 What happens if you get a message that's been stuck in a queue for a few
 days and has an old Date: header?

It would be missed.  I have set the timespan to look backwards for new
mail to one month to be a bit safer against the stuck-in-queue cases,
but mails with older Date: headers would definitely get missed.

The current output of notmuch count * is the same on both the client
and the server, so it seems I didn't run into this problem yet (maybe I
was just lucky).

 Or if you get new messages that have
 the same Message-ID as old ones?

Is that even possible?  I thought that notmuch guarantees the uniqueness
of indexed message ids.  The only reference I could find without trying
to read the code was this thread id:87mwyz3s9d@star.eba from 2012,
which supports the assumption.

 Synchronization of the notmuch tags database is only necessary when I
 switch between different client computers, which happens less
 frequently.

 Do you use a laptop everywhere?  I've found that for switching between
 my desktop machine at home, my laptop on the train, and my desktop at
 work (which amounts to five switches a day), the notmuch dump time is
 painfully slow--like well over 10 seconds for 100,000 messages.  Hook
 that into notmuch-poll and you have a recipe for hanging emacs every
 time you type G.

I have one laptop and one desktop and switch between them almost daily,
and run a hibernate script that does notmuch dump + git push, and a
resume script that does git pull + notmuch restore.  For hibernate /
resume the speed of those operations is acceptable, but I wouldn't want
to incur that wait for every time checking for new mail.

Here is how long they take (on a machine with an SSD, which certainly
helps):

$ time notmuch dump --format=batch-tag | sort  /tmp/notmuch.dump
real0m3.643s
user0m3.593s
sys 0m0.140s
$ time notmuch restore  /tmp/notmuch.dump
real0m3.719s
user0m3.357s
sys 0m0.357s
$ notmuch count 
117118



Til


pgp9eSTUw7Arc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: Synchronization success stories?

2014-04-13 Thread dm-list-email-notmuch
Tilmann Singer t...@tils.net writes:

 David Mazieres dm-list-email-notm...@scs.stanford.edu writes:
 What happens if you get a message that's been stuck in a queue for a few
 days and has an old Date: header?

 It would be missed.  I have set the timespan to look backwards for new
 mail to one month to be a bit safer against the stuck-in-queue cases,
 but mails with older Date: headers would definitely get missed.

 The current output of notmuch count * is the same on both the client
 and the server, so it seems I didn't run into this problem yet (maybe I
 was just lucky).

I've been playing around with reorganizing my maildir, and found a
couple of messages (on mailing lists) with clearly invalid dates years
in the past.  But checking with notmuch count is a good idea.  Then you
can always fall back to the slow path in the unlikely event that your
counts don't match up.  Well, except that A) count is just unique
message-IDs, not messages, and B) when synchronizing in both directions
you could still miss something.  You have to assume that the invalid
dates are only ever going to occur at one end of a synchronization
event.

 Or if you get new messages that have
 the same Message-ID as old ones?

 Is that even possible?  I thought that notmuch guarantees the uniqueness
 of indexed message ids.  The only reference I could find without trying
 to read the code was this thread id:87mwyz3s9d@star.eba from 2012,
 which supports the assumption.

Sadly, yes it is quite possible, and even opens up a slight security
issue.  Suppose I know you are on a mailing list, and some message
appears on that mailing list that I don't want you to see.  I can send
you an innocuous-looking message that just happens to have the same
message-id, and you may never see the original mailing list message.
Even better, depending on how your spam filtering is setup, if I include
the GTUBE string in my message you may never see mine or the original.

That's why with muchsync, I replicate actual mail messages, rather than
message-IDs.  Then you can always periodically check for message-IDs
that appear in more than one file.  (In fact, thought I haven't
published an interface for this, the SQL database kept my muchsync makes
it trivial to check for this and detect certain attacks.)

I understand why notmuch went with message IDs.  For instance you have
sent this reply both directly to me and to a mailing list I am
subscribed to.  So I will get two slightly different copies of the
message (one will have the standard notmuch mailing list signature, the
other won't).  And this way once I've marked it read, the message will
be read even once the second copy comes in.  But personally I'd rather
see the occasional duplicate message than risk not seeing messages.  In
particular, if the goal is to see fewer unread messages, some sort of
feature that pro-actively skips all future messages in a thread or
subthread would be more useful...

 Here is how long they take (on a machine with an SSD, which certainly
 helps):

 $ time notmuch dump --format=batch-tag | sort  /tmp/notmuch.dump
 real0m3.643s
 user0m3.593s
 sys 0m0.140s
 $ time notmuch restore  /tmp/notmuch.dump
 real0m3.719s
 user0m3.357s
 sys 0m0.357s
 $ notmuch count 
 117118

That's crazy.  I'm jealous.  Then again, this is how fast muchsync runs
(including a full database scan to detect changed messages and tags)
when there is no new mail:

$ time ./muchsync -v
[notmuch] No new mail.
synchronizing muchsync database with Xapian... 0.038506 (+0.038506)
starting scan of Xapian database... 0.039069 (+0.000563)
opened Xapian... 0.040851 (+0.001782)
scanned message IDs... 0.137647 (+0.096796)
scanned tags... 0.170404 (+0.032757)
scanned directories in xapian... 0.172100 (+0.001696)
scanned filenames in xapian... 0.172376 (+0.000276)
adjusted link counts... 0.199461 (+0.027085)
finished synchronizing muchsync database with Xapian... 0.212965 (+0.013505)

real0m0.220s
user0m0.173s
sys 0m0.023s

David
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: [PATCH] emacs: process crypto for reply only when specified

2014-04-13 Thread Tomi Ollila
On Sun, Apr 13 2014, David Bremner wrote:

 Tomi Ollila tomi.oll...@iki.fi writes:


 Code looks OK. +1. I'm interested to see whether replies to signed emails
 work on this system where sign/(de|en)cryption just doesn't work (out of
 the box) :D


 It's a good point. I need to insert my smartcard to sign things, which
 I'm sometimes too lazy to do. In my case, maybe I should stop being so
 lazy; I suspect my particular case is a but unusual.

Below is what happened to me when I failed to remove the 
#secure method=pgpmime mode=sign part from the beginning of the message
It is very easy to detect and there is nothing much one can use if they
have configured notmuch-crypto-process-mime to be t (like I seem to have ;)

--888888888888--
notmuch-crypto-process-mime is a variable defined in `one-notmuch.el'.
Its value is t
Original value was nil
--888888888888--

Emacs stopped responding my keypresses after C-c C-c; C-g brought control
back to me -- and then I tried again...

ps output

19028 ? SLs  0:00 /usr/bin/gpg --no-tty --status-fd 1 --yes --command-f
19029 ? SL   0:00 gpg-agent --server
19030 ? RL   0:50 /usr/bin/pinentry-curses
19034 ? SLs  0:00 /usr/bin/gpg --no-tty --status-fd 1 --yes --command-f
19035 ? SL   0:00 gpg-agent --server
19036 ? RL   0:04 /usr/bin/pinentry-curses
19037 pts/6 R+   0:00 ps x

The 'pinentry-curses' and this emacs doesn't play along well (I've seen
this happening before when I tried to encrypt some messages). I had
to pkill gpg and pinentry-curses to get rid of the above processes.

 Perhaps people with no ability to sign are less likely to have
 notmuch-crypto-process-mime set?  Or we can add another configuration
 variable initialized from notmuch-crypto-process-mime, but allowing
 people to shut this off.

Well, I set notmuch-crypto-process-mime to nil -- it still wants to
sign the message and runs gpg...

... my case may be unique enough no-one else has the same problem; anyway
ideas how to automatically kill the gpg process(es) when one aborts send
attempt? 

Tomi

___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: [PATCH] emacs: process crypto for reply only when specified

2014-04-13 Thread David Bremner
Tomi Ollila tomi.oll...@iki.fi writes:


 Well, I set notmuch-crypto-process-mime to nil -- it still wants to
 sign the message and runs gpg...


Was it nil when you replied, i.e. when the mml tags were created?

d
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: [PATCH] emacs: process crypto for reply only when specified

2014-04-13 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Sun, Apr 13 2014, Tomi Ollila tomi.oll...@iki.fi wrote:
 Perhaps people with no ability to sign are less likely to have
 notmuch-crypto-process-mime set?  Or we can add another configuration
 variable initialized from notmuch-crypto-process-mime, but allowing
 people to shut this off.

 Well, I set notmuch-crypto-process-mime to nil -- it still wants to
 sign the message and runs gpg...

Was my followup patch applied?  My patch controls the insertion of the
mml tag depending on whether or not notmuch-crypto-process-mime is t or
not.  If notmuch-crypto-process-mime is nil the tag won't be added.
Presumably you either did not have that patch applied, or had manually
set it to t?

In any event, if the mml tag is present, it's no longer in notmuch's
hands; emacs's mail processing is handling things and calling gpg-agent
to sign/encrypt the message.

Can you clarify what exactly your situation was?

Presumably people who have not set up any crypto processing should not
have notmuch-crypto-process-mime set t.

jamie.


pgp3U5wDLQOHU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch