The GNU Emacs Lisp Reference Manual section D.1 says:
> * Please don't require the cl package of Common Lisp extensions at
> run time. Use of this package is optional, and it is not part of
> the standard Emacs namespace. If your package loads cl at run time,
> that could cause name clashes for users who don't use that package.
>
> However, there is no problem with using the cl package at compile
> time, with (eval-when-compile (require 'cl)). That's sufficient for
> using the macros in the cl package, because the compiler expands
> them before generating the byte-code.
Follow this advice, requiring the following changes where `cl' was
used at runtime:
- replace `rassoc-if' in `notmuch-search-buffer-title' with the `loop'
macro and inline code. At the same time find the longest prefix
which matches the query rather than simply the last,
- replace `union', `intersection' and `set-difference' in
`notmuch-show-add-tag' and `notmuch-show-remove-tag' with local code
to calculate the result of adding and removing a list of tags from
another list of tags.
Call notmuch-fcc-header-setup from message-header-setup-hook rather
than message-send-hook. This allows you to see what's going to
happen, and to make manual adjustments if desired. Gnus does
something similar.
Signed-off-by: Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org>
Update the tests so that they no longer expect the Bcc header in the
output of "notmuch reply" now that it has been removed.
Edited-by Carl Worth: Simply applying the change to our newly
modularized test suite.
Notmuch reply should not be Bcc'ing the sender by default. This is
not the appropriate way to save copies of sent mail (which should
probably be handled by an Fcc header[*]) and it doesn't give the user the
option to not be bcc'd. This is really something that should be
handled by the reader UI. For instance, emacs message-mode can easily
be configured to add Bcc's if the user wishes.
[*] Carl Worth: The FCC header is now in place by default in the emacs
user-interface (and tested in the test suite) so the Bcc is ready to
be eliminated.
We test that the message we sent via (fake) SMTP is included in the mail
index after a "notmuch new". This verifies that the FCC setting indeed
successfully saved the sent message within the notmuch mail store.
Simply setting an explicit date is cleaner than letting the current,
(arbitrary), date get generated for the email message and then constantly
filtering that date out of search results.
Now that the FCC code is fixed to use the notmuch database path, we can
actually enable this by default, which should be highly useful for all
new users of notmuch.
Otherwise, FCC is too hard to use, (user must set it and also set message-
directory variable to match notmuch mail datbase path). As a rule, I'd like
for users of notmuch to not be required to muck around with non-notmuch
mail settings in emacs.
The above is only really possible now thanks to the recent addition of the
"notmuch config get" command which allows emacs to query the currently
configured notmuch database path.
This also now allows an absolute-path FCC to be set if desired.
We might as well be general here, and allow the "notmuch config" command
to query any stored value from the configuration file, (whether or not
the rest of the code actually knows anything about that value).
Rather than *reall* sending mail here, we instead have a new test
program, smtp-dummy which implements (a small piece of) the
server-side SMTP protocol and saves a mail message to the filename
provided. This gives us reasonable test coverage of a large chunk of
the notmuch+emacs code base (down to talking to an SMTP server with
the final mail contents).
We set the HOME environment variable to the test directory to avoid
the tests relying on any configuration files from the test author's
own home directory, (such as ${HOME}/.emacs or similar).
Now that notmuch_query_search_threads can return NULL, (for example,
due to a Xapian exception), we need to handle that case (rather than
just segfault). It's simple enough to just return a non-zero exit
code.
Previously, if the underlying search_messages hit an exception and returned
NULL, this function would ignore that and return a non-NULL, (but empty)
threads object. Fix this to properly propagate the error.
If Xapian sees unquoted ".." as in id:123..456 then it thinks that's a
range specification. We avoid this problem by instead passing
id:"123..456" to Xapian.
We simulate the act of selecting the "inbox" saved search from
notmuch-hello and the act of selecting a desired thread from the
notmuch-search results.
The test for the navigation of notmuch-hello is currently marked as
BROKEN since its output is in the opposite order compared to the
'(notmuch-search "tag:inbox")' test. This question of ordering is a
currently open issue on the notmuch mailing list, so we'll let the
test suite reflect that for now.
Finally, this commit also abstracts some common emacs lisp code,
(waiting for the current buffer's process to complete), into a new
notmuch-test-wait function that is made available to anything calling
test_emacs.
This should be quite handy for doing automated testing of the
emacs-based functionality in notmuch. This function invokes emacs with
the necessary command-line arguments, (to run in batch mode with no
local initialization, to load the notmuch code from the source
directory, and to ensure an 80-column width).
That is, a subject with a bracketed set of digits (and optionally a
slash), for example "[2010]" would cause the emacs code to misparse
the search results. Fix this by tweaking the regular expression.
While adding the documentation here for add_email_corpus I noticed
that the other email-adding functions in test-lib.sh were not yet
documented here, so add all of that documentation.
When the NOTMUCH variable was originally invented it was used as an
explicit path to the notmuch binary being tested. Today, the test
suite sets the PATH variable instead, so the NOTMUCH variable always
has a value of simply "notmuch".
We simplifying that by using the constant value rather than the
continual variable reference.
Thanks to the new git-based test suite, it's easy to run the whole
test suite in valgrind, (simply "make test OPTIONS="--valgrind"), and
doing so showed this obvious use-after-free bug, (triggered by the
thread-order tests).
A bug in the results-aggregation code was causing the test suite to report
"all tests passed" even when there were failures, (as long as there were
also no "broken" tests). Fix this.
Now that we can usefully pass section names via the NOTMUCH_SKIP_TESTS
environment variable, it's useful to actually print those names out
for the user. Then, since we're now printing these names, let's use
nicer names, (not excessively long but also not using abbreviations
like "msg").
In order for --valgrind to be useful, we drop noisy additional output of
all of the commands being executed in verbose mode. This makes --verbose
alone quite useless, so we don't document it any more.
Also, add a zlib valgrind suppression that was showing up frequently in the
test suite.
This file was obviously describing the git test suite previously, and
would have been very hard to understand in the context of the notmuch
test suite. HOpefully it's easier to follow now.
By scanning test-lib.sh for occurrences of "git" or "GIT", I found
that most of those are internal things, (like the GIT_TEST_TEE_STARTED
variable). But GIT_SKIP_TESTS is part of the user-interface to the
test suite, so we rename it to reference notmuch rather than git.
Also, the GIT_TRACE warning is git-specific, so we drop that as well.
Since we are now using an explicit list of tests to run in
notmuch-test we need to be careful that we don't add a new file of
tests and then forget to add it to the list.
The numbers were meaningless, and they made it hard to find a file of interest.
Instead, we get the ordering we want by adding an explicit list of
tests to run to the notmuch-test script.
These were interfering with the aggregate statistics reported at the
end of the test-suite run. (Always reporting 1 broken, 1 fixed, and 1
skipped). The correct way to test the test-suite itself would be to
run the test suite externally for these cases, capture the expected
result, and then report that as a PASS test.
But, really, there's almost no value in these tests anyway. It's
almost to the level of testing that 'if false; exit 1; fi' returns
1. That is, there are so many ways that the test suite could be broken
internally, that these minor tests don't really help.
