[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-23 Thread Carl Worth
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 01:28:38 -0500, Jesse Rosenthal wrote: > I just gave it a try, and building failed because of a seeming > misspelling on line 285 (`DT_UKNOWN'), from commit > 344c48a47de23cc63f1885d850b82359d1a34064 . Fixing the misspelling fixed > the build. That's embarrassing. I've

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-23 Thread Carl Worth
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:27:50 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote: > works for me, thanks Dirk. patch against HEAD is attached ( i hope. i'm > new to emacs mail :D ) Hi Arvid, Your original patch was sent as "application/octet-stream" which made it awkward to read, (I would have to manually save it

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-23 Thread Arvid Picciani
On 01/23/2010 03:29 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote: >>> done >> >> I'm still not sure what is slow for you, > > scanning 60k mails. :D That's not fixable, other then by not doing that. > > but I'm also not sure how the above would help. > > It doesn't scan all 60K individually but only the single new

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-23 Thread Arvid Picciani
On 01/23/2010 07:09 AM, Carl Worth wrote: > Your original patch was sent as "application/octet-stream" which made it > awkward to read, (I would have to manually save it rather than just > being able to read it within emacs with notmuch). uum yeah thanks. I'll try to figure out how this works.

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-23 Thread Jesse Rosenthal
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 19:09:35 +1300, Carl Worth wrote: > But I've since pushed a separate patch to fix this bug. Please give it a > try and let me know what you think. I just gave it a try, and building failed because of a seeming misspelling on line 285 (`DT_UKNOWN'), from commit

Re: [notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-23 Thread Arvid Picciani
On 01/23/2010 07:09 AM, Carl Worth wrote: Your original patch was sent as application/octet-stream which made it awkward to read, (I would have to manually save it rather than just being able to read it within emacs with notmuch). uum yeah thanks. I'll try to figure out how this works. But

Re: [notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-23 Thread Arvid Picciani
On 01/23/2010 03:29 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote: done I'm still not sure what is slow for you, scanning 60k mails. :D That's not fixable, other then by not doing that. but I'm also not sure how the above would help. It doesn't scan all 60K individually but only the single new one.

Re: [notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-22 Thread Jesse Rosenthal
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 19:09:35 +1300, Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org wrote: But I've since pushed a separate patch to fix this bug. Please give it a try and let me know what you think. I just gave it a try, and building failed because of a seeming misspelling on line 285 (`DT_UKNOWN'), from commit

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-16 Thread Dirk-Jan C. Binnema
Hi Olly, > "OB" == Olly Betts writes: OB> On 2010-01-15, Dirk-Jan C Binnema wrote: Olly> Other than Linux, the d_type field is available mainly only on BSD Olly> systems. >> >> Yes, my patch could me generalized a bit more, just like your patch could not >>

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-15 Thread Dirk-Jan C. Binnema
Hi Olly, > "Olly" == Olly Betts writes: Olly> On 2010-01-15, Dirk-Jan C Binnema wrote: >>> "Olly" == Olly Betts writes: Olly> Not a full patch, but I already posted what this code should look like Olly> to handle both systems without d_type, and those which return

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-15 Thread Olly Betts
On 2010-01-15, Dirk-Jan C Binnema wrote: >Olly> Other than Linux, the d_type field is available mainly only on BSD >Olly> systems. > > Yes, my patch could me generalized a bit more, just like your patch could not > hardcode the '/'-separator :) Well, '/' works as a directory

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-15 Thread Carl Worth
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 21:57:32 +0200, Dirk-Jan C. Binnema wrote: > Olly> Underscore prefixed identifiers are reserved by ISO C at file-scope; > Olly> using them yourself is undefined behaviour... > > Ah, thanks for reminding, I thought it was __ and _C (capital), but you are > right: > >

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-15 Thread Dirk-Jan C. Binnema
> "Olly" == Olly Betts writes: Olly> On 2010-01-14, Carl Worth wrote: >> On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:38:54 +0100, Adrian Perez de Castro wrote: >>> I am using XFS, which always returns DT_UNKNOWN. Taking into account that >>> there is a good deal of people using filesystems

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-15 Thread Arvid Picciani
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:47:10 +0200, Dirk-Jan C. Binnema wrote: > I take a slighly different approach in mu: works for me, thanks Dirk. patch against HEAD is attached ( i hope. i'm new to emacs mail :D ) It takes around half an hour for my 60K mail on reiserfs, but it did take 10 minutes

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-15 Thread Olly Betts
On 2010-01-15, Dirk-Jan C Binnema wrote: >> "Olly" == Olly Betts writes: >Olly> Not a full patch, but I already posted what this code should look > like >Olly> to handle both systems without d_type, and those which return > DT_UNKNOWN: > >Olly>

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-15 Thread Olly Betts
On 2010-01-14, Carl Worth wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:38:54 +0100, Adrian Perez de Castro igalia.com> wrote: >> I am using XFS, which always returns DT_UNKNOWN. Taking into account that >> there is a good deal of people using filesystems other than the ones you >> mention, and that other

Re: [notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-15 Thread Dirk-Jan C . Binnema
Hi Olly, Olly == Olly Betts o...@survex.com writes: Olly On 2010-01-15, Dirk-Jan C Binnema wrote: Olly == Olly Betts o...@survex.com writes: Olly Not a full patch, but I already posted what this code should look like Olly to handle both systems without d_type, and those which

Re: [notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-15 Thread Carl Worth
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 21:57:32 +0200, Dirk-Jan C. Binnema djcb.b...@gmail.com wrote: Olly Underscore prefixed identifiers are reserved by ISO C at file-scope; Olly using them yourself is undefined behaviour... Ah, thanks for reminding, I thought it was __ and _C (capital), but you are

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-14 Thread Adrian Perez de Castro
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:13:53 +0100, Arvid wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 09:38:00 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote: > > > on the first run (when no .notmuch is there yet), it finds some > > messages, but doesn't index them either. Yuk! I logged-in via Gmail's web interface and found that I have some

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-14 Thread Arvid Picciani
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 09:38:00 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote: > on the first run (when no .notmuch is there yet), it finds some > messages, but doesn't index them either. the offending commit is 2c4555f1a56602ff1dd55a63699810522ba4d91e from readdir (3): "Currently, only some file systems

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-14 Thread Carl Worth
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:38:54 +0100, Adrian Perez de Castro wrote: > > the offending commit is 2c4555f1a56602ff1dd55a63699810522ba4d91e > > > > from readdir (3): > > > > "Currently, only some file systems (among them: Btrfs, ext2, ext3, > > and ext4) have full support returning the

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-14 Thread Arvid Picciani
Hi, how do you add new mails to the index? manual says "notmuch new" should be enough, but it simply says "No new mail." on the first run (when no .notmuch is there yet), it finds some messages, but doesn't index them either. $ notmuch search tag:inbox $ $ notmuch search s $ -- Arvid

[notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-14 Thread Arvid Picciani
Hi, how do you add new mails to the index? manual says notmuch new should be enough, but it simply says No new mail. on the first run (when no .notmuch is there yet), it finds some messages, but doesn't index them either. $ notmuch search tag:inbox $ $ notmuch search s $ -- Arvid Asgaard

Re: [notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-14 Thread Carl Worth
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:38:54 +0100, Adrian Perez de Castro ape...@igalia.com wrote: the offending commit is 2c4555f1a56602ff1dd55a63699810522ba4d91e from readdir (3): Currently, only some file systems (among them: Btrfs, ext2, ext3, and ext4) have full support returning

Re: [notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-14 Thread Olly Betts
On 2010-01-14, Carl Worth wrote: On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:38:54 +0100, Adrian Perez de Castro ape...@igalia.com wrote: I am using XFS, which always returns DT_UNKNOWN. Taking into account that there is a good deal of people using filesystems other than the ones you mention, and that other

Re: [notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-14 Thread Dirk-Jan C . Binnema
Olly == Olly Betts o...@survex.com writes: Olly On 2010-01-14, Carl Worth wrote: On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:38:54 +0100, Adrian Perez de Castro ape...@igalia.com wrote: I am using XFS, which always returns DT_UNKNOWN. Taking into account that there is a good deal of people using

Re: [notmuch] indexing mail?

2010-01-14 Thread Olly Betts
On 2010-01-15, Dirk-Jan C Binnema wrote: Olly == Olly Betts o...@survex.com writes: Olly Not a full patch, but I already posted what this code should look like Olly to handle both systems without d_type, and those which return DT_UNKNOWN: Olly