Tags: upstream help On mandag 21 mars 2005, 15:07, Marc Sherman wrote: > Yes, the patch is the correct fix for 290927. My point was that it > makes it clear that there's an _additional_ bug, which the patch > doesn't fix.
Yeah, I guess so... > I'm sure that there are a lot of other rules that > aren't behaving correctly because of 300558 on Debian, that just > don't fail as spectacularly or obviously as ALL_TRUSTED, because of > the lack of Received parsing. Yeah, that could well be, good point. > > I think it is not much that can be done about it other than diving > > into it (i.e. the "patches welcome" answer) or filing a wishlist > > bug upstream about making SA parse the headers correctly... > > Yeah, I expect that the SA maintainer is going to forward this one > upstream. OK! I think they are pretty busy... I've been trying to do some helping by forwarding, reviewing, talking with upstream and stuff. > I'd help, but I don't know perl. Yup, I know Perl, but not enough about SA, and while I'd like to get more engaged in SA, there is no time... :-( However, could you perhaps ask the Exim folks how the Received headers are built, perhaps that makes it clear why SA fails to parse them. I'm not positive about this, but I think SA can use both Perl and POSIX regexps to parse stuff like this. Perhaps even an appropriate regexp exist. > Debian does have a lot > of perl hackers, so IMO it would be a good thing for Debian if the SA > maintainer would recruit some help fixing this one for Sarge -- it's > kind of important that SA work properly with the default MTA, if you > ask me. Hehe, yeah... I agree, but I'm not sure it is that easy to recruit people... Cheers, Kjetil -- Kjetil Kjernsmo Astrophysicist/IT Consultant/Skeptic/Ski-orienteer/Orienteer/Mountaineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/ OpenPGP KeyID: 6A6A0BBC
