On tisdagen den 12 februari 2008, Robert Millan wrote: > I spotted a few minor issues with the package (patch attached). > > > diff -ur libspf2-1.2.5.dfsg.old/debian/changelog > > libspf2-1.2.5.dfsg/debian/changelog --- > > libspf2-1.2.5.dfsg.old/debian/changelog 2008-02-12 17:19:36.000000000 > > +0100 +++ libspf2-1.2.5.dfsg/debian/changelog 2008-02-12 > > 17:27:35.000000000 +0100 @@ -18,8 +18,9 @@ > > a permanent error as well (Closes: #435139). > > * 41_none_not_neutral.dpatch: Use a diffent explanation for > > SPF_RESULT_NONE than the one for SPF_RESULT_NEUTRAL (Closes: > > #435140). - * 42_empty_sender.dpatch: Use the HELO identity in MAIL FROM > > checks if - the sender address has been set to the empty string > > (Closes: #431239). + * 42_empty_sender.dpatch (rewritten differently): > > Use the HELO identity in + MAIL FROM checks if the sender address > > has been set to the empty string + (Closes: #431239). > > * debian/control: Add XS-Vcs-* fields. > > Indentation is broken here. This lead me to believe 42_empty_sender.dpatch > was unrelated to the patch I sent before (which got me confused for a > while).
Hmm, yes, the indentation does seem to be off. > Btw, I notice you rewrote the 42_empty_sender.dpatch part of my patch > differently. Is your new code tested / known to work? As far as I can recall I tested it. It was also discussed on the mailing list. > > ## DP: If SPF_request_set_env_from() is called with from set to the > > empty -## DP: string, use the HELO identity. Also fix incorrect handling > > when +## DP: string (i.e a DSN), use the HELO identity. Also fix > > incorrect handling when ## DP: the local part is empty (but the "@" is > > present). > > Just a suggestion, to make it clear why this is done. Minor change indeed, but no reason why I shouldn't make that clarification. > > diff -ur libspf2-1.2.5.dfsg.old/src/libspf2/spf_server.c > > libspf2-1.2.5.dfsg/src/libspf2/spf_server.c --- > > libspf2-1.2.5.dfsg.old/src/libspf2/spf_server.c 2005-02-19 > > 04:52:58.000000000 +0100 +++ libspf2-1.2.5.dfsg/src/libspf2/spf_server.c > > 2008-02-12 17:29:22.000000000 +0100 @@ -279,8 +279,7 @@ > > SPF_dns_rr_free(rr_txt); > > spf_response->result = SPF_RESULT_NONE; > > spf_response->reason = SPF_REASON_FAILURE; > > - return SPF_response_add_error(spf_response, > > -SPF_E_NOT_SPF, > > + return SPF_response_add_error(spf_response, > > SPF_E_NOT_SPF, "Host '%s' not found.", domain); break; > > Just an ugly glitch I found. I think my patch included fix for this, can't > recall right now. I intentionally omitted that part of your patch since I don't believe that code formatting errors warrant managing patches. Besides, all of the source code is messed up since they've mixed spaces and tabs and assumed a tab width of 4, so that single patch doesn't make a significant difference. Regards, -- Magnus Holmgren
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
