Date: Tue, 2 Jan 1996 00:18:40 -0600 (CST) From: "Gil Kloepfer Jr." <gil@limbic.ssdl.com> To: peter@freefall.freebsd.org (Peter Wemm) Cc: peter@freefall.freebsd.org, freebsd-bugs@freefall.freebsd.org, eric@reference.com, sendmail@sendmail.org Subject: Re: misc/922 Message-ID: <199601020618.AAA11366@limbic.ssdl.com> In-Reply-To: <199601011236.EAA20439@freefall.freebsd.org> from "Peter Wemm" at Jan 1, 96 04:36:09 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I got two messages on this problem. I now know what the code in mail.local does, and as Eric points out, my fix breaks the intent of the code: | To: "Gil Kloepfer Jr." <gil@limbic.ssdl.com> | From: Eric Allman <eric@sendmail.org> | Subject: Re: Bad From line handling in mail.local (fwd) | Date: Sat, 30 Dec 1995 09:37:48 -0800 | | The point of this is to minimize the amount of body munging that goes | on. I believe elm is broken, not mail.local. | | eric And as Peter stated, here is why elm is broken: > This is actually intended behavior... > > The end-of-message marker is a blank line followed by "^From ".. > ie: > "\n\nFrom " > > So, if you have a message like this: (indented for example) > > foo bar baz > From this I can see blah.. > > It should not be escaped because there is not a blank line. I found the bug in elm and will report it there. In case any of you are interested, it's in newmbox.c and what needs to be done is to check for a blank line before "From " in order to determine that it is entering a new mail header (except, of course, on the first message). I have a fix, but I will let it go through the normal channels unless anyone wants my fix. My apologies about the mail.local bug scare. It was a fix, just not the right one!! :) Thanks again for your quick feedback! Happy New Year! Gil.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199601020618.AAA11366>