On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 01:51:08PM -0500, Derek Martin wrote: > On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 02:14:46PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2018-06-05 10:03:55 -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: > > > Just a heads up that inotify polling was committed to master earlier > > > this week. > > > > > > There _are_ still a few quirks with it that I'm looking into. > > > Specifically weird behavior with Esc-prefixed commands. I won't have > > > time to debug that until this weekend though. > > > > > > If you notice other issues, please let me know. > > > > I've just tried it, and there is a major regression: it now fails to > > detect new mail at all in the current mailbox, even when moving the > > cursor, viewing messages, modifying the mailbox and synchronizing! > > > > I'm using the Maildir format.
Vincent, so far I can't duplicate this. I'm a bit surprised, because the mail detection code itself wasn't changed. inotify is watching the maildir and returns a "timeout" event - but Mutt still has uses $timeout and $mail_check normally. Can you double check the change in behavior by switching between stable and master again? > I haven't looked at the patch, but I have been meaning to point out > that inotify can miss events, under system load (I think it's mostly > kernel memory pressure, but exactly how is probably irrelevant). So > if Mutt will include such a feature, it would probably be prudent to > not rely on it solely. Yes, this is an addition. In fact, $mail_check is still consulted, and if you have it set to a large value "mailboxes" will won't be noticed much faster. -- Kevin J. McCarthy GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C 5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
