New submission from anonymous:
When I use 'F' to search a message, sup returns a thread, and most of the time,
I have to use '/' again to select the right message.
I would like that, after a search, matching messages are highlighted in some
way.
--
messages: 200
nosy: anonymous
priorit
Hi,
the attached patch uses nanosecond resolution to generate the unique id for
each message of a maildir. This is necessary because I have about 2000 messages
which have the same mtime and size. I am not sure on how to properly check for
ruby 1.9 and do the right thing. Also, the user probably ne
Hi,
attached you find a patch to make sup-tweak-labels work with 1.9. Maybe the
line can be written more beautifully.
Best regards,
Michael
0001-Make-sup-tweak-labels-work-with-ruby-1.9.patch
Description: Binary data
___
Sup-devel mailing list
Sup-dev
Hi,
attached you find a patch which ensures that LC_MESSAGES=C is set when starting
gpg so that the regexps for interpreting the gpg output work.
Best regards,
Michael
0001-Use-LC_MESSAGES-C-when-starting-gpg-so-that-the-rege.patch
Description: Binary data
__
Excerpts from Michael Stapelberg's message of Fri Mar 19 11:36:37 -0400 2010:
> the attached patch uses nanosecond resolution to generate the unique id for
> each message of a maildir. This is necessary because I have about 2000
> messages
> which have the same mtime and size.
This a great idea,
Hi Mark,
Excerpts from Mark Alexander's message of 2010-03-19 20:17:01 +0100:
> This a great idea, but if I understand correctly, it requires a file
> system that supports nanosecond resolution on timestamps, like ext4.
> Those of us on ext3 are out of luck, apparently:
> https://ext4.wiki.kerne
Excerpts from Michael Stapelberg's message of Fri Mar 19 15:27:36 -0400 2010:
Hi Michael,
> Looks like you are right. The change won’t break on ext3, though, the
> nanoseconds will just be zero. Time to upgrade to ext4, I’d say ;-).
I like the idea here, but requiring ruby 1.9 _and_ a filesystem
Excerpts from Mark Alexander's message of Fri Mar 19 15:17:01 -0400 2010:
> Excerpts from Michael Stapelberg's message of Fri Mar 19 11:36:37 -0400 2010:
> > the attached patch uses nanosecond resolution to generate the unique id for
> > each message of a maildir. This is necessary because I have a
Hi Eric,
Excerpts from Eric Sherman's message of 2010-03-19 20:34:32 +0100:
> Would inserting an SHA1 into the id solve these problems, or does it just
> introduce more problems?
The latter. The ID needs to be linear, not only unique.
Best regards,
Michael
___
Hi Ben,
Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of 2010-03-19 20:35:31 +0100:
> I like the idea here, but requiring ruby 1.9 _and_ a filesystem
> upgrade for a _mail client_ is a bit of a stretch, don't you think?
> Isn't there a more portable solution?
There is: Rich mentioned that proper move/delete
Excerpts from Michael Stapelberg's message of Fri Mar 19 15:47:53 -0400 2010:
> There is: Rich mentioned that proper move/delete handling for
> maildirs also solves the problem. However that doesn’t seem to be
> planned for the very near future, so I posted my patch which fixes
> the problem right
Excerpts from Michael Stapelberg's message of Fri Mar 19 15:47:53 -0400 2010:
> Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of 2010-03-19 20:35:31 +0100:
> > Isn't there a more portable solution?
> There is: Rich mentioned that proper move/delete handling for maildirs also
> solves the problem.
I must have
Excerpts from Michael Stapelberg's message of Fri Mar 19 15:46:29 -0400 2010:
> Excerpts from Eric Sherman's message of 2010-03-19 20:34:32 +0100:
> > Would inserting an SHA1 into the id solve these problems, or does it just
> > introduce more problems?
> The latter. The ID needs to be linear, not
Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of 2010-03-19 16:05:06 -0400:
> Excerpts from Michael Stapelberg's message of Fri Mar 19 15:47:53 -0400 2010:
>
> > There is: Rich mentioned that proper move/delete handling for
> > maildirs also solves the problem. However that doesn’t seem to be
> > planned for
Excerpts from Eric Sherman's message of Fri Mar 19 16:40:46 -0400 2010:
> Would appending x-digits of numeric noise, probably derived from SHA1, be
> suitable?
I was thinking the same thing. For performance, perhaps only the SHA1
of the file name, not the file contents, would be adequate.
__
Excerpts from Mark Alexander's message of 2010-03-19 16:35:38 -0400:
> Excerpts from Michael Stapelberg's message of Fri Mar 19 15:47:53 -0400 2010:
> > Excerpts from Ben Walton's message of 2010-03-19 20:35:31 +0100:
> > > Isn't there a more portable solution?
> > There is: Rich mentioned that pro
Excerpts from Mark Alexander's message of Fri Mar 19 17:04:11 -0400 2010:
> Excerpts from Eric Sherman's message of Fri Mar 19 16:40:46 -0400 2010:
> > Would appending x-digits of numeric noise, probably derived from SHA1, be
> > suitable?
>
> I was thinking the same thing. For performance, perh
17 matches
Mail list logo
