bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#34974: 27.0.50; Moving article error with duplicate suppression disa


From: Basil L. Contovounesios
Subject: bug#34974: 27.0.50; Moving article error with duplicate suppression disabled
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 14:59:55 +0000
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux)

"Basil L. Contovounesios" <address@hidden> writes:

> With gnus-suppress-duplicates left at its default value of nil, trying
> to move an article with 'B m <group>' gives me the following backtrace:
>
> Debugger entered--Lisp error: (wrong-type-argument hash-table-p nil)
>   remhash("<redacted-message-id>" nil)
>   gnus-dup-unsuppress-article(1988)
>   gnus-summary-move-article(nil)
>   funcall-interactively(gnus-summary-move-article nil)
>   call-interactively(gnus-summary-move-article nil nil)
>   command-execute(gnus-summary-move-article)
>
> I'm no expert, and I haven't tried reproducing this with a minimal
> config, but I think gnus-summary-move-article should not call
> gnus-dup-unsuppress-article when gnus-suppress-duplicates is nil, right?
>
> This issue seems to have been uncovered by the switch to hash-tables in
> bug#33653.  Previously, gnus-dup-unsuppress-article called unintern,
> which would not complain when its second argument gnus-dup-hashtb was
> nil, even though it probably should have.
>
> Patch to follow.

Sorry, this is a duplicate of bug#34973, which was reported first and
where I've now sent my suggested patch.

I was going to merge the two bug reports, but then I read that the
debbugs 'merge' command requires reports to be assigned to the same
package.

This report was created by the gnus-bug command, which assigned it to
both packages emacs and gnus and version 5.13, whereas the other report
was presumably created by report-emacs-bug and assigned to the emacs
package, version 27.0.50.

So, which package+version combination should Gnus bugs be assigned to?
How should these two reports be merged?  Does merging keep all parties
CCed, or do they have to be CCed anew?

Thanks,

-- 
Basil





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]