[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: wooo corruption
From:       Don Sanders <dsanders () cch ! com ! au>
Date:       2000-03-26 6:01:36
[Download RAW message or body]

Hopefully you can keep on thinking about the search dialog. I think we will
need an extra level of abstraction for background searching. Basically we need
a folder iterator that iterates over messages in a folder. It has to be 'event
safe', so when another part of KMail deletes/adds messages to a folder, or
even deletes a folder the iterator still has to return sensible results. This
will require editing the kmfolder code (and perhaps the kmfoldermgr code) but
not much else.

If the search dialog finds a match then it should store the KMMsgBase
rather than the message number, this way you can use KMFolder::find to
refind the message.

Actually now I think about it this should not be too hard. Anyway if in 6 weeks
time or so you can check in a blocking version of the search dialog that uses
KMFolder's rather than searching the raw folder file on disk (I don't know
which way you planned to do it) then it shouldn't be too hard to make it fairly
non-blocking.

BFN,
Don.

On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, George Staikos wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> On Wed, 22 Mar 2000, Don Sanders wrote:
> > You're right marcj1's message was the culprit, it contains an invalid date line
> > > Date:   21 Mar 00 20:42:56 PST
> > 
> > You would have been fine if you were using KMail from the head branch :-)
> > 
> > Alternatively you could get KMail 1.0.29.1 from the KDE_1_1_BRANCH branch.
> > I just updated this a few days ago
> > http://www.nebsllc.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/kdenetwork/kmail/?hideattic=1&sortby=date&only_with_tag=KDE_1_1_BRANCH
> >  and posted a note here about it
> > http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-kmail&m=95328260908687&w=2
> > 
> > Daniel if I send you a tar.gz of the KMail source for 1.0.29.1 would you be
> > able to put it up on the website?
> > 
> 
> Cool !   This is proof enough for me that we have found the bug.  Congrats
> > )
> 
> I'm not too worried about fixing it on my machine, but I'm using kde1.1 so I
> want to stay with non kde2 stuff.  No risks on my main workstation!!
> 
> Sorry I've been a bad teammate lately... :/  I've been too busy with school. 
> I will do my best to get back to the code within 6 weeks :)
> 
> - -- 
> 
> George Staikos 
> 
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP 6.5.2
> 
> iQEVAwUBONmQUPaardfOEhQRAQH5swf+JTm1Z3kxTViCF3wQ8juUc3+hRRKE9cWw
> s0vHVfpK/s17XjlJ8+EKu3W4ApH1G0G4Tm2raOP0/YN78oUa2MOHcjrIFrK5eDBx
> bmaArd0g1+o0AzL8AbxRIzzT42mr8RnSg4tN6WdsLCJaLlTQUrxyCx5A2MBm0lL3
> +rywxViVgyIrwkqYfPZ0pdd9pzwZ9dC8LSLV6m3GlfaUo4GA1S8WOMW2jiFJbiVy
> kDq1L38NvfhLCL6Wrf3sJ+49+Jcei8KwDo5NZmv7+8JmbdKv1z/ZQcxxO4YL5cOJ
> WO696QlEkpEC7rjIcbxmNtvhuYLnxb8lrX1dIhk2nVCnwfTSz/ouzQ==
> =IdOa
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]