[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-09-07 Thread David Bremner
On Tue, 06 Sep 2011 15:51:42 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > Everyone that I know of who has tried to reproduce this bug has been > able to. I vote that we include this patch in 0.8, so that we can get > it out of the way. I have pushed this to master. Sorry, I still don't plan to

[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-09-07 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 18:46:10 -0300, David Bremner wrote: > I have pushed this to master. Sorry, I still don't plan to include it in > 0.8. I think it is better to have a short strict freeze, than a long > friendly one. Ok, thanks. Just as long as I don't have to push to get this fix applied

Re: [PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-09-07 Thread David Bremner
On Tue, 06 Sep 2011 15:51:42 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: Everyone that I know of who has tried to reproduce this bug has been able to. I vote that we include this patch in 0.8, so that we can get it out of the way. I have pushed this to master. Sorry, I

Re: [PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-09-07 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 18:46:10 -0300, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote: I have pushed this to master. Sorry, I still don't plan to include it in 0.8. I think it is better to have a short strict freeze, than a long friendly one. Ok, thanks. Just as long as I don't have to push to get this

[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-09-06 Thread Dmitry Kurochkin
Hi Jamie. On Tue, 06 Sep 2011 09:43:00 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > On Fri, 3 Jun 2011 10:01:06 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins finestructure.net> wrote: > > This was a minor oversite in checking of part type when outputing > > content raw. This was causing gmime was to throw an

[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-09-06 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
Everyone that I know of who has tried to reproduce this bug has been able to. I vote that we include this patch in 0.8, so that we can get it out of the way. jamie. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature

[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-09-06 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Fri, 3 Jun 2011 10:01:06 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > This was a minor oversite in checking of part type when outputing > content raw. This was causing gmime was to throw an exception to > stderr. I'm finding it perplexing that this patch still hasn't been applied, considering how

Re: [PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-09-06 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
Everyone that I know of who has tried to reproduce this bug has been able to. I vote that we include this patch in 0.8, so that we can get it out of the way. jamie. pgpEBorFl1kU2.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ notmuch mailing list

[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-27 Thread Austin Clements
Quoth Jameson Graef Rollins on Jun 27 at 2:44 pm: > On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:43:36 -0400, Austin Clements > wrote: > > Just to clarify my understanding, --format=raw is only intended to > > work on either the whole message (special-cased in do_show_single) or > > a leaf MIME part, and in any

[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-27 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On 06/27/2011 04:43 PM, Austin Clements wrote: > Just to clarify my understanding, --format=raw is only intended to > work on either the whole message (special-cased in do_show_single) or > a leaf MIME part, and in any other case, it will output nothing? The > raw output test cases seem pretty

[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-27 Thread Austin Clements
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 16:33:18 -0700, Carl Worth wrote: >> I'd like to investigate this case a little bit to help answer the >> question of whether "notmuch should have done anything in this case". > > Hi, Carl. ?You can see this

[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-27 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 16:33:18 -0700, Carl Worth wrote: > I'd like to investigate this case a little bit to help answer the > question of whether "notmuch should have done anything in this case". Hi, Carl. You can see this error if you try to output raw a multipart/* or message/rfc822 part, ie:

Re: [PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-27 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 16:33:18 -0700, Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org wrote: I'd like to investigate this case a little bit to help answer the question of whether notmuch should have done anything in this case. Hi, Carl. You can see this error if you try to output raw a multipart/* or

Re: [PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-27 Thread Austin Clements
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Jameson Graef Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote: On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 16:33:18 -0700, Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org wrote: I'd like to investigate this case a little bit to help answer the question of whether notmuch should have done anything in this case.

Re: [PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-27 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On 06/27/2011 04:43 PM, Austin Clements wrote: Just to clarify my understanding, --format=raw is only intended to work on either the whole message (special-cased in do_show_single) or a leaf MIME part, and in any other case, it will output nothing? The raw output test cases seem pretty thin.

Re: [PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-27 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:43:36 -0400, Austin Clements amdra...@mit.edu wrote: Just to clarify my understanding, --format=raw is only intended to work on either the whole message (special-cased in do_show_single) or a leaf MIME part, and in any other case, it will output nothing? The raw output

Re: [PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-27 Thread Austin Clements
Quoth Jameson Graef Rollins on Jun 27 at 2:44 pm: On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:43:36 -0400, Austin Clements amdra...@mit.edu wrote: Just to clarify my understanding, --format=raw is only intended to work on either the whole message (special-cased in do_show_single) or a leaf MIME part, and in

[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-23 Thread Carl Worth
On Fri, 3 Jun 2011 10:01:06 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > This was a minor oversite in checking of part type when outputing > content raw. This was causing gmime was to throw an exception to > stderr. > > Unfortunately the gmime exception was not being caught by notmuch, or > the test

[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-03 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
This was a minor oversite in checking of part type when outputing content raw. This was causing gmime was to throw an exception to stderr. Unfortunately the gmime exception was not being caught by notmuch, or the test suite. I'm not sure if notmuch should have done anything in this case, but

[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-02 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
This was a minor oversite in checking of part type when outputing content raw. This was causing gmime was to throw an exception to stderr. Unfortunately the gmime exception was not being caught by notmuch, or the test suite. I'm not sure if notmuch should have done anything in this case, but

[PATCH] Do not attept to output part raw if part is not GMimePart.

2011-06-02 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
This was a minor oversite in checking of part type when outputing content raw. This was causing gmime was to throw an exception to stderr. Unfortunately the gmime exception was not being caught by notmuch, or the test suite. I'm not sure if notmuch should have done anything in this case, but