From pmr@pajato.com Wed Sep 3 01:15:48 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (2007-08-08) on rzlab.ucr.edu X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.9 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,FVGT_m_MULTI_ODD, MDO_DATING14,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=ham version=3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 Received: (at submit) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 3 Sep 2008 08:15:49 +0000 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (fencepost.gnu.org [140.186.70.10]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m838FiRc004301 for ; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 01:15:45 -0700 Received: from mail.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166]:55200 helo=mx10.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1KanV7-0004cE-QZ for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:14:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KanWf-0005gk-2R for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:15:43 -0400 Received: from mail.pajato.com ([68.191.253.210]:50232 helo=copa.pajato.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KanWa-0005fl-2L; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:15:36 -0400 Received: from lilly (copa.pajato.com [68.191.253.210]) by copa.pajato.com (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m838FYwT018953; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 04:15:34 -0400 Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:15:33 -0400 Message-Id: From: Paul Michael Reilly To: rms@gnu.org CC: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org In-reply-to: (rms@gnu.org) Subject: Re: Bug in handling invisible text, and bug in Pmail. Reply-to: pmr@pajato.com References: X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (copa.pajato.com [68.191.253.210]); Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:15:34 -0400 (EDT) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) "Richard M. Stallman" writes: > I think it is also a bug in Pmail. Pmail should set the buffer boundaries > after that text, rather than making it invisible. I don't think it is that simple because "that text" is simply part of the collection of headers, some of which have been specified to be invisible as Emacs displays the message, i.e. the X-Coding-System: header can, according to rfc2822, precede or follow the Date: header. This, if I understand the issue and your desires properly, makes setting the buffer boundaries a non-workable solution. I don't know what the right solution is yet. Worst case, the issue is an indictment of using invisible text to hide the headers. Yuck. -pmr > If Pmail is fixed, then it won't trigger the invisible text bug. > But I think it needs to be fixed anyway. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >From Brand@xyzxysxysbb.com Fri Aug 22 01:11:22 2008 > X-Coding-System: undecided-unix > Return-path: > Envelope-to: rms@gnu.org > Delivery-date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 01:11:22 -0400 > Received: from mx10.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166]:43206) > by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) > (envelope-from ) > id 1KWOvi-0001Cl-Jw > for rms@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 01:11:22 -0400 > Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) > (envelope-from ) > id 1KWOwz-0000Ti-Nv > for rms@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 01:12:44 -0400 > X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on monty-python > X-Spam-Level: > X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, > FORGED_RCVD_HELO,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=3.1.0 > Received: from sh.day.org ([198.102.73.65]:47087) > by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) > (envelope-from ) > id 1KWOwz-0000T4-E6 > for rms@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 01:12:41 -0400 > X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e > Received: from vree.xyzxysxysbb.com (sh.day.org [198.102.73.65]) > by sh.day.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18A9EC6988A39 > for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 22:12:38 -0700 (PDT) > Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by vree.xyzxysxysbb.com (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id m7M1kbEs004491 > for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:46:46 -0700 > Message-Id: <200808220146.m7M1kbEs004491@vree.xyzxysxysbb.com> > To: rms@gnu.org > Subject: sorry that I was distracted with phone calls > From: Brand@xyzxysxysbb.com > Reply-to: brand@xyzxysxysbb.com > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:46:37 -0700 > X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. > X-BABYL-V6-ATTRIBUTES: A------ > > > > Two other ideas to run past you when time permits. > > /w From rgm@gnu.org Wed Sep 3 09:02:25 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (2007-08-08) on rzlab.ucr.edu X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.4 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MISSING_SUBJECT, MURPHY_DRUGS_REL8,NOSUBJECT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,VALID_BTS_CONTROL, X_DEBBUGS_NO_ACK autolearn=ham version=3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 Received: (at control) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 3 Sep 2008 16:02:25 +0000 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (fencepost.gnu.org [140.186.70.10]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m83G2IEW007479 for ; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 09:02:19 -0700 Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Kaumd-00057L-Pq; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 12:00:39 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18622.46247.726360.238974@fencepost.gnu.org> Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 12:00:39 -0400 From: Glenn Morris To: control X-Attribution: GM X-Mailer: VM (www.wonderworks.com/vm), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs) X-Hue: white X-Ran: S-d!7I*Y_(CI,6)z~NW0p971xvA';jG~n+{6sgB!1W8~yuPgDf-/K,n)%R>n; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 09:39:13 -0700 Received: from alfajor.home (vpn-132-204-232-121.acd.umontreal.ca [132.204.232.121]) by chene.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m83GdANS007486; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 12:39:10 -0400 Received: by alfajor.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id CB9211C971; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 12:39:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: pmr@pajato.com Cc: 869@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#869: Bug in handling invisible text, and bug in Pmail. Message-ID: References: Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 12:39:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Paul Michael Reilly's message of "Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:15:33 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV3095=0 > I don't think it is that simple because "that text" is simply part of > the collection of headers, some of which have been specified to be > invisible as Emacs displays the message, i.e. the X-Coding-System: > header can, according to rfc2822, precede or follow the Date: header. > This, if I understand the issue and your desires properly, makes > setting the buffer boundaries a non-workable solution. I don't know > what the right solution is yet. Worst case, the issue is an > indictment of using invisible text to hide the headers. Yuck. But is that specific to Pmail? I.e. doesn't Rmail use the same texhcnique (or even code) to hide the headers? If Pmail is indeed different, could you explain to me why Pmail had to change this part of the code? It seems unrelated to babyl-vs-mbox. Stefan From rms@gnu.org Wed Sep 3 17:12:25 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (2007-08-08) on rzlab.ucr.edu X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER, MDO_DATING14,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 Received: (at submit) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 4 Sep 2008 00:12:25 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [199.232.76.165]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m840CMW3017708 for ; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 17:12:23 -0700 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kb2ST-0007QG-HX for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:12:21 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kb2ST-0007Pj-1T for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:12:21 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39770 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Kb2SS-0007PW-Sp for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:12:20 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:45574) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Kb2SS-0008EO-JR for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:12:20 -0400 Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Kb2Qr-0002o3-Nt; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:10:41 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 From: "Richard M. Stallman" To: Stefan Monnier , 869@debbugs.gnu.org CC: pmr@pajato.com, bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com, 869@debbugs.gnu.org, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Wed, 03 Sep 2008 12:39:09 -0400) Subject: Re: bug#869: Bug in handling invisible text, and bug in Pmail. Reply-to: rms@gnu.org References: Message-Id: Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:10:41 -0400 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-CrossAssassin-Score: 2 Rmail hides some headers by making a copy of the whole header. In that copy it deletes the uninteresting headers. Babyl format makes special provision for that. Pmail cannot use that method. If we make Pmail always display the current message decoded in a separate buffer, we could delete uninteresting header fields from that buffer. From rms@gnu.org Wed Sep 3 17:12:58 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (2007-08-08) on rzlab.ucr.edu X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 Received: (at submit) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 4 Sep 2008 00:12:58 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [199.232.76.165]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m840CtGb017826 for ; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 17:12:56 -0700 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kb2T0-00086a-Jg for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:12:54 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kb2Sz-00085K-FT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:12:54 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39802 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Kb2Sz-000855-AX for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:12:53 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:45662) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Kb2Sz-0008Ka-6T for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:12:53 -0400 Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Kb2RO-0002ul-ED; Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:11:14 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 From: "Richard M. Stallman" To: pmr@pajato.com, 869@debbugs.gnu.org CC: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org In-reply-to: (message from Paul Michael Reilly on Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:15:33 -0400) Subject: Re: bug#869: Bug in handling invisible text, and bug in Pmail. Reply-to: rms@gnu.org References: Message-Id: Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:11:14 -0400 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) > I think it is also a bug in Pmail. Pmail should set the buffer boundaries > after that text, rather than making it invisible. I don't think it is that simple because "that text" is simply part of the collection of headers, some of which have been specified to be invisible as Emacs displays the message, i.e. the X-Coding-System: header can, according to rfc2822, precede or follow the Date: header. Why does that make it not simple? You can move the uninteresting headers to the top and put point-min after them. Also, if it is necessary to display the decoded message in a separate buffer then Pmail can delete the unwanted headers in that buffer. From pmr@pajato.com Wed Sep 3 23:54:54 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (2007-08-08) on rzlab.ucr.edu X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FOURLA, HAS_BUG_NUMBER,MDO_DATING14 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 Received: (at 869) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 4 Sep 2008 06:54:54 +0000 Received: from copa.pajato.com (mail.pajato.com [68.191.253.210]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m846spCb019737 for <869@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Wed, 3 Sep 2008 23:54:52 -0700 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (copa.pajato.com [68.191.253.210]) by copa.pajato.com (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m846sopr002653; Thu, 4 Sep 2008 02:54:50 -0400 Message-ID: <48BF8639.7070905@pajato.com> Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 02:54:49 -0400 From: Paul Michael Reilly User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080723) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stefan Monnier CC: 869@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#869: Bug in handling invisible text, and bug in Pmail. References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (copa.pajato.com [68.191.253.210]); Thu, 04 Sep 2008 02:54:50 -0400 (EDT) Stefan Monnier wrote: >> I don't think it is that simple because "that text" is simply part of >> the collection of headers, some of which have been specified to be >> invisible as Emacs displays the message, i.e. the X-Coding-System: >> header can, according to rfc2822, precede or follow the Date: header. >> This, if I understand the issue and your desires properly, makes >> setting the buffer boundaries a non-workable solution. I don't know >> what the right solution is yet. Worst case, the issue is an >> indictment of using invisible text to hide the headers. Yuck. > > But is that specific to Pmail? I.e. doesn't Rmail use the same > texhcnique (or even code) to hide the headers? > If Pmail is indeed different, could you explain to me why Pmail had to > change this part of the code? It seems unrelated to babyl-vs-mbox. Apparently, Rmail/babyl rearranges the headers and then sets the buffer boundaries, thus eliminating the problem. Rmail/mbox could have (and probably should have) used the same approach. Now however, it is pretty clear that a presentation buffer is in order to deal with the coding issue, something I ill understand today but I'm gradually picking up. I also think that the coding issue implicitly means better MIME handling within Rmail. Not hardly a bad thing, especially given modern Emacs' improved graphic capabilities. -pmr From rgm@gnu.org Wed Feb 25 19:57:27 2009 Received: (at control) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 26 Feb 2009 03:57:27 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (2008-06-10) on rzlab.ucr.edu X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.5 Bayes not run. spammytokens:Tokens not available. hammytokens:Tokens not available. X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=4.0 tests=VALID_BTS_CONTROL autolearn=ham version=3.2.5-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (fencepost.gnu.org [140.186.70.10]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id n1Q3vL63009075 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 19:57:23 -0800 Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1LcXKz-00072r-09; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:55:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18854.4760.940911.972299@fencepost.gnu.org> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:55:04 -0500 From: Glenn Morris To: control Subject: control message reassign 686 emacs,w32 reassign 1780 emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com severity 2473 wishlist reassign 2468 spam reassign 2469 spam reassign 2471 spam severity 2474 wishlist severity 973 wishlist tags 846 wontfix reassign 1131 emacs,ns severity 1226 minor severity 1253 minor severity 1339 minor tags 1339 moreinfo severity 1474 wishlist severity 1582 minor severity 1646 minor tags 1753 moreinfo reassign 2475 spam From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jul 27 20:28:19 2011 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Jul 2011 00:28:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QmESZ-0000eR-Be for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 20:28:19 -0400 Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QmESY-0000eL-2S for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 20:28:18 -0400 Received: from cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no ([84.215.51.58] helo=stories.gnus.org) by hermes.netfonds.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QmESS-0008Dr-7j for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 02:28:12 +0200 Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 02:27:59 +0200 Message-Id: To: control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Subject: control message for bug #846 X-MailScanner-ID: 1QmESS-0008Dr-7j X-Netfonds-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Netfonds-MailScanner-From: larsi@gnus.org MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1312417692.41783@85Y5+6mGLtszn3HNVeHiMg X-Spam-Status: No X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) close 846 From unknown Tue Jun 17 21:55:22 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 11:24:03 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator