On , March 11, 2003 at 13:48:45, Klaus Zeitler wrote: > >>>>> "Robert" == mailspam1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > mailspam1> > mailspam1> On , February 10, 2003 at 15:30:21, Klaus Zeitler > mailspam1> wrote: > >> when headers like e.g. reply-to are hidden in gnus (with > >> gnus-treat-hide-boring-headers set to 'head), bbdb return a > >> garbage mail address. ... I think bbdb should operate on the > >> original article and not on the presentation buffer of the > >> article (this would avoid the problem) > >> > >> Should I report this as an emacs bug in mail-fetch-field? > mailspam1> > mailspam1> Neither. > mailspam1> > mailspam1> I have just committed a fix, now we are calling > mailspam1> gnus-fetch-field, which should do a better job. > > I was just about to report a fix for that. I think the main reason > why it didn't work was that bbdb should look in > gnus-original-article-buffer instead of in gnus-article-buffer. The > message buffer is selected with function bbdb-header-start in > bbdb-hooks. > > The code in 2.35 (don't have the CVS version) starts with > > --- snip --- > (defun bbdb-header-start () > "Returns a marker at the beginning of the header block of the > current > message. This will not necessarily be in the current buffer." > (cond ((memq major-mode > '(gnus-group-mode gnus-subject-mode gnus-article-mode)) > (set-buffer gnus-original-article-buffer) > --- snip --- > > that should be > '(gnus-group-mode gnus-summary-mode > gnus-article-mode)) > instead cause there's no gnus-subject-mode. That may have been me > who introduced this bug (IIRC I've suggested that as a fix for the > really outdated gnus-Group-mode, gnus-Subject-mode and > gnus-Article-mode about a year ago or so, but not only had the mode > names changed to the low case ones but also the name for > gnus-Subject-mode). > > > While I was at it I've checked if there are more places in bbdb > where gnus-article-buffer is used and I found 2 more uses of > gnus-article-buffer (in 2.35) where I suspect that > gnus-original-article-buffer might be better: > > 1. bbdb/gnus-update-records > 2. bbdb/gnus-summary-show-all-recipients
My latest commit should fix all these, thanks for reporting them. > Besides do we still need code for the really old gnus, i.e. the > lines that deal with gnus-Group-mode, gnus-Subject-mode and > gnus-Article-mode? I push this decision to Waider .. ;c) Bye Robert ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
