From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: nicolas.pouillard@gmail.com (Nicolas Pouillard)
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:06:02 +0100
Subject: [sup-talk] EOFError crash
In-Reply-To: <1225981048-sup-9011@blackpad>
References: <1225392037-sup-9224@gillespie.rupamsunyata.org>
	<1225647558-sup-7206@gillespie.rupamsunyata.org>
	<1225907100-sup-4816@entry> <1225981048-sup-9011@blackpad>
Message-ID: <1225983752-sup-1166@ausone.inria.fr>

Excerpts from Eduardo Habkost's message of Thu Nov 06 15:33:23 +0100 2008:
> Excerpts from William Morgan's message of Wed Nov 05 15:48:34 -0200 2008:
> > Reformatted excerpts from Decklin Foster's message of 2008-11-02:
> > > This just happened again. Should I put it into ditz or something? (I
> > > feel exceedingly lame, but I don't have time to debug it today
> > > either.)
> > 
> > No. Sadly, this is one of the innumerable Ferret errors that crop up
> > from time to time, which spurred STS.
> 
> I've been easily reproducing crashes similar to this one. The only thing
> I need to reproduce it is making sure I load another label while sup is
> still polling for new messages.
> 
> If I deliver a lot of new messages to a maildir source and don't run
> sup-sync, sup will spend a few seconds loading the new messages and
> there is plenty of time to hit L, go to a label (I don't know if it
> needs to be the same label the new messages being loaded are getting),
> and see the crash.

I rarely use 'L', however I often search for particular set of mails
using '\', maybe it's a general problem with search during poll.

In this case perhaps making sup a little bit more sequential would make
it more robust (this could help us to wait for STS).

Best regards,

-- 
Nicolas Pouillard aka Ertai