The following issue requires your FEEDBACK. 
====================================================================== 
http://www.dbmail.org/mantis/view.php?id=377 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                idk
Assigned To:                
====================================================================== 
Project:                    DBMail
Issue ID:                   377
Category:                   IMAP daemon
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   minor
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     feedback
target:                      
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             14-Jul-06 16:18 CEST
Last Modified:              14-Jul-06 20:14 CEST
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    IMAPD returns invalid FETCH ENVELOPE field when
there are multiple addresses
Description: 
I have a message with header

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED];[EMAIL PROTECTED]

When I fetch this message

A001 UID FETCH 315406 (ENVELOPE)

I got on Fedora Core 3

* 59 FETCH (ENVELOPE ("date" "subject" ((NIL NIL "sender" "my.dom")) ((NIL
NIL "sender" "my.dom")) ((NIL NIL "sender" "my.cz")) ((NIL NIL "one"
"my.dom;")("two" "my.dom")) NIL NIL NIL "id") UID 315406)
A001 OK UID FETCH completed

and on Fedora Core 5

* 59 FETCH (ENVELOPE ("date" "subject" ((NIL NIL "sender" "my.dom")) ((NIL
NIL "sender" "my.dom")) ((NIL NIL "sender" "my.cz")) ((NIL NIL "one"
"my.dom;two" "my.dom")) NIL NIL NIL "id") UID 315406)
A001 OK UID FETCH completed

(the difference is in "to" field:

((NIL NIL "one" "my.dom;")("two" "my.dom"))

vs.

((NIL NIL "one" "my.dom;two" "my.dom"))

no one is good)
====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 idk - 14-Jul-06 18:03  
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
One more info: header with additive ", " string is stored into database on
FC3, but FC5, so the issue is (maybe) when message is to be inserting into
database (MySQL), so LMTP daemon?

If so, I have find on the wrong place :( 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 idk - 14-Jul-06 18:27  
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
:(

tcpdump on local lmtp port shows me an additive ", " string in incomming
request, so the "comma issue" begins in postfix - on FC3 is 2.1.5 postfix
installed and on FC5 2.2.8

Ok, now I know from where is a ", " string. But stills problem with
delimiter. The delimiter in 822 message is (fixme if it's not true) ";"
char. And multiple "@" chars makes multiple and nonsense field outputs in
FETCH reply. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 paul - 14-Jul-06 20:14  
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>From your report it is unclear how this impacts 2.1.x. If you say there are
no significant diffs between 2.0.10 and 2.1.6 you're not looking at the
right source code. They are vastly different especially in this area:
mime-parsing.

This also smells like a bug in gmime Robbie Stone reported in
http://www.dbmail.org/mantis/view.php?id=368. Could
you please compare notes with that bug and also, if it looks similar,
please test svn-trunk?

For the record: mime bugs in 2.0 will (most likely) not be fixed. Not be
me anyway. 

Issue History 
Date Modified   Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
14-Jul-06 16:18 idk            New Issue                                    
14-Jul-06 18:03 idk            Note Added: 0001300                          
14-Jul-06 18:27 idk            Note Added: 0001301                          
14-Jul-06 20:14 paul           Note Added: 0001302                          
14-Jul-06 20:14 paul           Severity                 major => minor      
14-Jul-06 20:14 paul           Status                   new => feedback     
======================================================================

Reply via email to