Re: Forcing a rescan of folder
This might be on the way to tracking this down. New mail arrived while sending mail (between hitting "y" and regaining control of mutt). Mutt didn't catch new mail arriving, and couldn't be motivated to check the mailbox until more new mail arrived. Ben On Mon, May 01, 2000 at 05:55:57PM -0500, David DeSimone wrote: > Benjamin Korvemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Can I force mutt to rescan the current folder (I'm using maildirs)? $ > > only commits the changes, but doesn't pick up the new mail in the box, > > yet gbuffy lets me know there's more mail. > > There isn't a function to cause a re-scan, because Mutt is simply > supposed to do it without being told. There is a variable $timeout > which tells Mutt how often to do it while waiting for commands, and > there is another variable $mail_check which determines how often to do > it when you are entering commands. They should have reasonable > defaults, though. > > Anyway, Mutt is supposed to notice new mail without being told to look > for it. > > -- > David DeSimone | "The doctrine of human equality reposes on this: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | that there is no man really clever who has not > Hewlett-Packard | found that he is stupid." -- Gilbert K. Chesterson > Richardson IT|PGP: 5B 47 34 9F 3B 9A B0 0D AB A6 15 F1 BB BE 8C 44 > -- Benjamin Korvemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hey! It compiles! Ship it!
Re: Forcing a rescan of folder
On Tue, May 02, 2000 at 12:36:46PM -0500, David DeSimone wrote: > Mikko Hänninen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I use Maildir over NFS. I find myself frequently in a situation where > > I see in my incoming mail log that I've gotten mail in a particular > > folder while I'm reading it, but Mutt doesn't seem to notice it. It > > certainly takes much longer than the 5 seconds that the $mail_check > > value would indicate, assuming I understood its meaning correctly... > > I wonder if this could possibly be some sort of NFS caching issue or > > something? > > That would be quite unfortunate, as NFS is one of the main reasons to > prefer maildir over other mailbox formats. Mutt does, though, appear to > pay attention to the modified time on the directory, as an optimization > for checking for new messages. So it looks like that could well be the > issue. Try playing around with storing files in a directory from one > NFS client, then examining the modified time of the directory from > another client. Ugh. Hmm. it would seem NFS may be to blame. New mail was sent at 11:57, and presumably arrived within a few minutes. As can be seen, the "tmp" directory was modified at 11:58, but the "new" dir hasn't. Presumably, something might be wanted. (Using mutt-1.1.14) Fingers might be pointed at procmail (3.14), as I've checked (a) the machine I'm using, (b) the machine where the disk physically lives and (c) the machine doing the mail, and they all agree on the times coming out of stat. fort-kent[0-101]% stat * File: "cur" Size: 1536 Filetype: Directory Mode: (0755/drwxr-xr-x) Uid: ( 398/benjamin) Gid: ( 14/grad) Device: 0,13 Inode: 202758Links: 2 Access: Mon May 8 12:21:58 2000(0.00:07:06) Modify: Mon May 8 10:56:33 2000(0.01:32:31) Change: Mon May 8 10:56:33 2000(0.01:32:31) File: "new" Size: 512 Filetype: Directory Mode: (0755/drwxr-xr-x) Uid: ( 398/benjamin) Gid: ( 14/grad) Device: 0,13 Inode: 318215Links: 2 Access: Mon May 8 12:27:51 2000(0.00:01:13) Modify: Mon May 8 10:18:35 2000(0.02:10:29) Change: Mon May 8 12:29:02 2000(0.00:00:02) File: "tmp" Size: 512 Filetype: Directory Mode: (0755/drwxr-xr-x) Uid: ( 398/benjamin) Gid: ( 14/grad) Device: 0,13 Inode: 202782Links: 2 Access: Mon May 8 02:58:16 2000(0.09:30:48) Modify: Mon May 8 11:58:37 2000(0.00:30:27) Change: Mon May 8 11:58:37 2000(0.00:30:27) -- Benjamin Korvemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Capital punishment turns the state into a murderer. But imprisonment turns the state into a gay-dungeon master. - Emo Philips
Re: Forcing a rescan of folder
Mikko Hänninen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I use Maildir over NFS. I find myself frequently in a situation where > I see in my incoming mail log that I've gotten mail in a particular > folder while I'm reading it, but Mutt doesn't seem to notice it. It > certainly takes much longer than the 5 seconds that the $mail_check > value would indicate, assuming I understood its meaning correctly... > I wonder if this could possibly be some sort of NFS caching issue or > something? That would be quite unfortunate, as NFS is one of the main reasons to prefer maildir over other mailbox formats. Mutt does, though, appear to pay attention to the modified time on the directory, as an optimization for checking for new messages. So it looks like that could well be the issue. Try playing around with storing files in a directory from one NFS client, then examining the modified time of the directory from another client. -- David DeSimone | "The doctrine of human equality reposes on this: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | that there is no man really clever who has not Hewlett-Packard | found that he is stupid." -- Gilbert K. Chesterson Richardson IT|PGP: 5B 47 34 9F 3B 9A B0 0D AB A6 15 F1 BB BE 8C 44
Re: Forcing a rescan of folder
David DeSimone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Mon, 01 May 2000: > Anyway, Mutt is supposed to notice new mail without being told to look > for it. I have $mail_check set to 5 (and $timeout at 600, but I don't think that matters). I use Maildir over NFS. I find myself frequently in a situation where I see in my incoming mail log that I've gotten mail in a particular folder while I'm reading it, but Mutt doesn't seem to notice it. It certainly takes much longer than the 5 seconds that the $mail_check value would indicate, assuming I understood its meaning correctly... I wonder if this could possibly be some sort of NFS caching issue or something? Mikko -- // Mikko Hänninen, aka. Wizzu // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // http://www.iki.fi/wiz/ // The Corrs list maintainer // net.freak // DALnet IRC operator / // Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy & scifi, the Corrs / Being paranoid doesn't mean that they *aren't* out to get you.
Re: Forcing a rescan of folder
Benjamin Korvemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Can I force mutt to rescan the current folder (I'm using maildirs)? $ > only commits the changes, but doesn't pick up the new mail in the box, > yet gbuffy lets me know there's more mail. There isn't a function to cause a re-scan, because Mutt is simply supposed to do it without being told. There is a variable $timeout which tells Mutt how often to do it while waiting for commands, and there is another variable $mail_check which determines how often to do it when you are entering commands. They should have reasonable defaults, though. Anyway, Mutt is supposed to notice new mail without being told to look for it. -- David DeSimone | "The doctrine of human equality reposes on this: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | that there is no man really clever who has not Hewlett-Packard | found that he is stupid." -- Gilbert K. Chesterson Richardson IT|PGP: 5B 47 34 9F 3B 9A B0 0D AB A6 15 F1 BB BE 8C 44
Forcing a rescan of folder
I've probably just overlooked it, although I've looked a few times (when agravation exceeded laziness) and can't find it in the online help or user manual. Can I force mutt to rescan the current folder (I'm using maildirs)? $ only commits the changes, but doesn't pick up the new mail in the box, yet gbuffy lets me know there's more mail. Changing folders to the current folder works, but that commits/discards changes, and I don't necessarily want something that drastic. Thanks, Ben -- Benjamin Korvemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
