Bugs item #1246004, was opened at 2005-07-27 15:19
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by schoinobates
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1246004&group_…
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: mail delivery
Group: 2.1 (stable)
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Auke Kok (sofar)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: 2.1.6 bin/arch bombs out on unicodeerror
Initial Comment:
Running bin/arch on my i18n- development list I got
this beauty:
Updating HTML for article 2390
Updating HTML for article 2391
Pickling archive state into
/var/mailman/archives/private/xfce-i18n/pipermail.pck
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "bin/arch", line 200, in ?
main()
File "bin/arch", line 188, in main
archiver.processUnixMailbox(fp, start, end)
File "/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/pipermail.py",
line 573, in processUnixMailbox
self.add_article(a)
File "/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/pipermail.py",
line 625, in add_article
article.parentID = parentID =
self.get_parent_info(arch, article)
File "/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/pipermail.py",
line 657, in get_parent_info
article.subject)
File
"/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py", line
311, in getOldestArticle
self.__openIndices(archive)
File
"/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py", line
251, in __openIndices
t = DumbBTree(os.path.join(arcdir, archive + '-' + i))
File
"/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py", line
65, in __init__
self.load()
File
"/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py", line
179, in load
self.__sort(dirty=1)
File
"/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py", line
73, in __sort
self.sorted.sort()
UnicodeDecodeError: 'ascii' codec can't decode byte
0xc3 in position 0: ordinal not in range(128)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Schoinobates Volans (schoinobates)
Date: 2007-02-28 22:16
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=41822
Originator: NO
The script needs to actually upgrade all archive volumes, not only the
current one, because if a post to a ML comes with a date in the past, it
will be added to the old volume.
New script:
#! /usr/bin/python
#
# Copyright (C) 2007 Lionel Elie Mamane <lmamane(a)debian.org>
#
# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
# modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
# as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2
# of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
#
# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
# GNU General Public License for more details.
#
# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
# along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
# Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA
02110-1301, USA.
"""Convert a list's archive databases to unicode where appropriate
This script is intended to be run as a bin/withlist script, i.e.
% bin/withlist -l -r unicodify_archives <mylist>
"""
import paths
import time
from Mailman.i18n import _
from Mailman import mm_cfg
def unicodify_string(s):
if isinstance(s,unicode):
return s
elif isinstance(s,str):
try:
return s.decode()
except UnicodeDecodeError:
pass
try:
return s.decode('utf-8')
except UnicodeDecodeError:
pass
return s.decode('windows-1252', 'replace')
def unicodify_fst(t):
l = list(t[1:])
l.insert(0, unicodify_string(t[0]))
return tuple(l)
def unicodify_archives(mlist):
# Only act if we are using the internal archiver
if mm_cfg.PUBLIC_EXTERNAL_ARCHIVER:
return
else:
from Mailman.Archiver import HyperArch
h = HyperArch.HyperArchive(mlist)
for archive in h.archives:
for hdr in ('subject', 'author'):
h.database.mapKeys(unicodify_fst, archive, hdr)
h.close()
if __name__ == '__main__':
print _(__doc__.replace('%', '%%'))
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Schoinobates Volans (schoinobates)
Date: 2007-02-27 23:45
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=41822
Originator: NO
In Debian, we fixed that problem with the following patch and running the
following withlist script on all mailing list on upgrade. Let me note in
passing that the code for clearIndex looks very suspicious: it takes an
"index" argument but completely ignores it. It should probably clear its
argument and not be hardcoded to clear the thread index.
--- Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py 2005-08-27 03:40:17.000000000 +0200
+++ Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py 2007-02-27 20:33:41.103527160 +0100
@@ -324,15 +343,22 @@
def clearIndex(self, archive, index):
self.__openIndices(archive)
if hasattr(self.threadIndex, 'clear'):
self.threadIndex.clear()
return
finished=0
try:
key, msgid=self.threadIndex.first()
except KeyError: finished=1
while not finished:
del self.threadIndex[key]
try:
key, msgid=self.threadIndex.next()
except KeyError: finished=1
+
+ def mapKeys(self, f, archive, index):
+ self.__openIndices(archive)
+ index = getattr(self, index + 'Index')
+ d = index.dict
+ index.dict = dict(zip(map(f, d.keys()), d.values()))
+ index.__dirty = 1
#! /usr/bin/python
#
# Copyright (C) 2007 Lionel Elie Mamane <lmamane(a)debian.org>
#
# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
# modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
# as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2
# of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
#
# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
# GNU General Public License for more details.
#
# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
# along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
# Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA
02110-1301, USA.
"""Convert a list's archive databases to unicode where appropriate
This script is intended to be run as a bin/withlist script, i.e.
% bin/withlist -l -r unicodify_archives <mylist>
"""
import paths
import time
from Mailman.i18n import _
from Mailman import mm_cfg
def unicodify_string(s):
if isinstance(s,unicode):
return s
elif isinstance(s,str):
try:
return s.decode()
except UnicodeDecodeError:
pass
try:
return s.decode('utf-8')
except UnicodeDecodeError:
pass
return s.decode('windows-1252', 'replace')
def unicodify_fst(t):
l = list(t[1:])
l.insert(0, unicodify_string(t[0]))
return tuple(l)
def unicodify_archives(mlist):
# Only act if we are using the internal archiver
if mm_cfg.PUBLIC_EXTERNAL_ARCHIVER:
return
else:
from Mailman.Archiver import HyperArch
h = HyperArch.HyperArchive(mlist)
currentVolume = h.dateToVolName(time.time())
if currentVolume in h.archives:
for hdr in ('subject', 'author'):
h.database.mapKeys(unicodify_fst, currentVolume, hdr)
h.close()
if __name__ == '__main__':
print _(__doc__.replace('%', '%%'))
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2006-12-15 19:10
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
See the threads at
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-developers/2006-February/018587.ht…
and
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2006-February/049345.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Eugene Crosser (crosser)
Date: 2006-12-15 11:37
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=124141
Originator: NO
I can see the same thing (line numbers are different) with 2.1.9 version.
Can it be that no one else got bitten by it yet? How to fix it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1246004&group_…
Bugs item #1246004, was opened at 2005-07-27 15:19
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by schoinobates
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1246004&group_…
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: mail delivery
Group: 2.1 (stable)
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Auke Kok (sofar)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: 2.1.6 bin/arch bombs out on unicodeerror
Initial Comment:
Running bin/arch on my i18n- development list I got
this beauty:
Updating HTML for article 2390
Updating HTML for article 2391
Pickling archive state into
/var/mailman/archives/private/xfce-i18n/pipermail.pck
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "bin/arch", line 200, in ?
main()
File "bin/arch", line 188, in main
archiver.processUnixMailbox(fp, start, end)
File "/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/pipermail.py",
line 573, in processUnixMailbox
self.add_article(a)
File "/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/pipermail.py",
line 625, in add_article
article.parentID = parentID =
self.get_parent_info(arch, article)
File "/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/pipermail.py",
line 657, in get_parent_info
article.subject)
File
"/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py", line
311, in getOldestArticle
self.__openIndices(archive)
File
"/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py", line
251, in __openIndices
t = DumbBTree(os.path.join(arcdir, archive + '-' + i))
File
"/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py", line
65, in __init__
self.load()
File
"/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py", line
179, in load
self.__sort(dirty=1)
File
"/var/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py", line
73, in __sort
self.sorted.sort()
UnicodeDecodeError: 'ascii' codec can't decode byte
0xc3 in position 0: ordinal not in range(128)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Schoinobates Volans (schoinobates)
Date: 2007-02-27 23:45
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=41822
Originator: NO
In Debian, we fixed that problem with the following patch and running the
following withlist script on all mailing list on upgrade. Let me note in
passing that the code for clearIndex looks very suspicious: it takes an
"index" argument but completely ignores it. It should probably clear its
argument and not be hardcoded to clear the thread index.
--- Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py 2005-08-27 03:40:17.000000000 +0200
+++ Mailman/Archiver/HyperDatabase.py 2007-02-27 20:33:41.103527160 +0100
@@ -324,15 +343,22 @@
def clearIndex(self, archive, index):
self.__openIndices(archive)
if hasattr(self.threadIndex, 'clear'):
self.threadIndex.clear()
return
finished=0
try:
key, msgid=self.threadIndex.first()
except KeyError: finished=1
while not finished:
del self.threadIndex[key]
try:
key, msgid=self.threadIndex.next()
except KeyError: finished=1
+
+ def mapKeys(self, f, archive, index):
+ self.__openIndices(archive)
+ index = getattr(self, index + 'Index')
+ d = index.dict
+ index.dict = dict(zip(map(f, d.keys()), d.values()))
+ index.__dirty = 1
#! /usr/bin/python
#
# Copyright (C) 2007 Lionel Elie Mamane <lmamane(a)debian.org>
#
# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
# modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
# as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2
# of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
#
# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
# GNU General Public License for more details.
#
# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
# along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
# Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA
02110-1301, USA.
"""Convert a list's archive databases to unicode where appropriate
This script is intended to be run as a bin/withlist script, i.e.
% bin/withlist -l -r unicodify_archives <mylist>
"""
import paths
import time
from Mailman.i18n import _
from Mailman import mm_cfg
def unicodify_string(s):
if isinstance(s,unicode):
return s
elif isinstance(s,str):
try:
return s.decode()
except UnicodeDecodeError:
pass
try:
return s.decode('utf-8')
except UnicodeDecodeError:
pass
return s.decode('windows-1252', 'replace')
def unicodify_fst(t):
l = list(t[1:])
l.insert(0, unicodify_string(t[0]))
return tuple(l)
def unicodify_archives(mlist):
# Only act if we are using the internal archiver
if mm_cfg.PUBLIC_EXTERNAL_ARCHIVER:
return
else:
from Mailman.Archiver import HyperArch
h = HyperArch.HyperArchive(mlist)
currentVolume = h.dateToVolName(time.time())
if currentVolume in h.archives:
for hdr in ('subject', 'author'):
h.database.mapKeys(unicodify_fst, currentVolume, hdr)
h.close()
if __name__ == '__main__':
print _(__doc__.replace('%', '%%'))
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2006-12-15 19:10
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
See the threads at
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-developers/2006-February/018587.ht…
and
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2006-February/049345.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Eugene Crosser (crosser)
Date: 2006-12-15 11:37
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=124141
Originator: NO
I can see the same thing (line numbers are different) with 2.1.9 version.
Can it be that no one else got bitten by it yet? How to fix it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1246004&group_…
Bugs item #1495122, was opened at 2006-05-25 12:24
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by msapiro
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1495122&group_…
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: mail delivery
Group: 2.1 (stable)
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Bart Jacobs (radiantskies)
>Assigned to: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Summary: Mailman strips format=flowed from Content-Type header
Initial Comment:
It seems that Mailman strips the format=flowed
argument from the Content-Type: text/plain header
when delivering incoming e-mails to subscribers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-26 09:39
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
I replaced the patch again. This time, the Scrubber.py patch is
functionally identical to 217616: flowed.patch.txt, but I have added more
comments to the Scrubber patch specifically related to why it won't work
for the archive or the plain format digest.
The Decorate.py patch has been updated to remove any trailing spaces from
lines of msg_header and msg_footer so they won't be inadvertently flowed.
I have the feeling that the biggest issue for most occurs in Decorate.py
in adding msg_header and/or msg_footer, and this is fixed.
File Added: flowed.patch.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-24 22:38
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
I have replaced the flowed.patch.txt file attached. The previous scrubber
patch didn't work. This one has been more thoroughly tested and does work
at least for the test cases tried. There is an additional fix in this
scrubber patch which has to do with getting the appropriate character set
for the part separator. See the thread beginning at
<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2006-November/054515.html>.
File Added: flowed.patch.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-19 17:12
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
I have attached a patch (flowed.patch.txt) that applies to Mailman 2.1.9
and 2.1.8. Line numbers may need adjusting for earlier versions.
This is a preliminary patch for testing and shouldn't be considered
official at this point. Feedback will be appreciated.
File Added: flowed.patch.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: P T Withington (ptwithy)
Date: 2006-10-13 13:37
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=615189
Thanks, that's great.
For now, I am very happy that I can just turn off my footer and get the
right
behavior (as a work-around).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2006-10-13 11:23
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Regarding the previous comment. I don't disagee with you,
and my 2006-06-13 comment wasn't meant to imply that I
wasn't interested in fixing this, just that there might be
more to it than is apparent at first glance. I do have it on
my 'to do' list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: P T Withington (ptwithy)
Date: 2006-10-13 10:05
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=615189
Man this bug drives me NUTS! Surely it is more important to maintain the
content of the message that to quibble about the format on header/footer.
Any halfway intelligent mail client will wrap long URLs, expecting them to
be
reflowed by the recipient, but since mailman strips out the format and
delsp
from the Content-type, the recipient is left in the lurch and sees the URL
as
multiple lines.
In format-flowed, only lines that end in <space><linefeed> are re-flowed.
If
the header/footer lines end in <linefeed> they will not be reflowed, so I
don't
see the need to have a different format for them?
What am I missing?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2006-06-13 09:34
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
I think you have found the cause. Scrubber also does the
same thing when flattening the message, but now we have a
difficult decision.
If we want to 'fix' Decorate, we now are faced with a
situation where we may be adding a 'format=fixed' header
and/or footer to a 'format=flowed' message body. This
potential incompatability may require us to 'wrap' the
message and add the header/footer as separate parts in this
case. This will undoubtedly raise additional complaints.
In the case of Scrubber, this may lead us to scrub the
actual message body part - not a good thing.
I may be over-reacting here. It may turn out that it is OK
to render the header/footer/scrubber messages as
'format=flowed'. Although I can contrive a footer for
example (by putting trailing spaces on intermediate lines)
that will be munged by rendering as 'format=flowed', this
may not be a problem in practice, and Decorate could always
be made to strip the spaces.
There are also potentially issues with stripping of leading
spaces because of the assumption that they are 'stuffed'. I
don't know how big an issue this is in practice.
Note, if we do preserve 'format=' we also need to preserve
'delsp='.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Bart Jacobs (radiantskies)
Date: 2006-06-12 23:54
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=924185
I've browsed the mailman source code a bit and I found
some suspicious code
in /trunk/mailman/Mailman/Handlers/Decorate.py. If the
list admin specifies a header or footer to be added to
outgoing messages, then the content-type header is zapped
and then regenerated from just the charset info, i.e. the
format=flowed parameter is lost.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1495122&group_…
Bugs item #1495122, was opened at 2006-05-25 12:24
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by msapiro
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1495122&group_…
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: mail delivery
Group: 2.1 (stable)
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Bart Jacobs (radiantskies)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: Mailman strips format=flowed from Content-Type header
Initial Comment:
It seems that Mailman strips the format=flowed
argument from the Content-Type: text/plain header
when delivering incoming e-mails to subscribers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-24 22:38
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
I have replaced the flowed.patch.txt file attached. The previous scrubber
patch didn't work. This one has been more thoroughly tested and does work
at least for the test cases tried. There is an additional fix in this
scrubber patch which has to do with getting the appropriate character set
for the part separator. See the thread beginning at
<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2006-November/054515.html>.
File Added: flowed.patch.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-19 17:12
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
I have attached a patch (flowed.patch.txt) that applies to Mailman 2.1.9
and 2.1.8. Line numbers may need adjusting for earlier versions.
This is a preliminary patch for testing and shouldn't be considered
official at this point. Feedback will be appreciated.
File Added: flowed.patch.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: P T Withington (ptwithy)
Date: 2006-10-13 13:37
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=615189
Thanks, that's great.
For now, I am very happy that I can just turn off my footer and get the
right
behavior (as a work-around).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2006-10-13 11:23
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Regarding the previous comment. I don't disagee with you,
and my 2006-06-13 comment wasn't meant to imply that I
wasn't interested in fixing this, just that there might be
more to it than is apparent at first glance. I do have it on
my 'to do' list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: P T Withington (ptwithy)
Date: 2006-10-13 10:05
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=615189
Man this bug drives me NUTS! Surely it is more important to maintain the
content of the message that to quibble about the format on header/footer.
Any halfway intelligent mail client will wrap long URLs, expecting them to
be
reflowed by the recipient, but since mailman strips out the format and
delsp
from the Content-type, the recipient is left in the lurch and sees the URL
as
multiple lines.
In format-flowed, only lines that end in <space><linefeed> are re-flowed.
If
the header/footer lines end in <linefeed> they will not be reflowed, so I
don't
see the need to have a different format for them?
What am I missing?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2006-06-13 09:34
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
I think you have found the cause. Scrubber also does the
same thing when flattening the message, but now we have a
difficult decision.
If we want to 'fix' Decorate, we now are faced with a
situation where we may be adding a 'format=fixed' header
and/or footer to a 'format=flowed' message body. This
potential incompatability may require us to 'wrap' the
message and add the header/footer as separate parts in this
case. This will undoubtedly raise additional complaints.
In the case of Scrubber, this may lead us to scrub the
actual message body part - not a good thing.
I may be over-reacting here. It may turn out that it is OK
to render the header/footer/scrubber messages as
'format=flowed'. Although I can contrive a footer for
example (by putting trailing spaces on intermediate lines)
that will be munged by rendering as 'format=flowed', this
may not be a problem in practice, and Decorate could always
be made to strip the spaces.
There are also potentially issues with stripping of leading
spaces because of the assumption that they are 'stuffed'. I
don't know how big an issue this is in practice.
Note, if we do preserve 'format=' we also need to preserve
'delsp='.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Bart Jacobs (radiantskies)
Date: 2006-06-12 23:54
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=924185
I've browsed the mailman source code a bit and I found
some suspicious code
in /trunk/mailman/Mailman/Handlers/Decorate.py. If the
list admin specifies a header or footer to be added to
outgoing messages, then the content-type header is zapped
and then regenerated from just the charset info, i.e. the
format=flowed parameter is lost.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1495122&group_…
Bugs item #1667570, was opened at 2007-02-23 16:07
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by msapiro
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1667570&group_…
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: security/privacy
Group: 2.1 (stable)
Status: Closed
Resolution: Invalid
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: RegExp not working in 2.1.5
Initial Comment:
Under "accept_these_nonmembers (privacy): List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted." I have the following RegExp's and I still continue to receive notices as the admin to approve the email from addresses listed below. I tested the RegExp to make sure that the e-mail addresses are successfully matched and they are. I believe in 2.1.2 this was working fine with the same RegExp.
List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted.
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?qchron\.(?=com$|net$).*$
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$
post from emeeks(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
post from ahutchi(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
post from jsimmon(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
I saw no previous bug reports on this and am unsure if this is fixed in 2.1.9 so I submitted it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 19:46
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
I'm not sure you understand what require_explicit_destination and
acceptable_aliases do.
If require explicit destination is Yes, some address in the To: or Cc:
headers of the post must be either the list posting address or match an
address or re in acceptable aliases.
If you put ^[^@]+@(.*\.)?qchron\.(?=com$|net$).*$ in acceptable aliases,
it will only have an effect if a matching address (e.g.
jdoe(a)server.qchron.net) is in the To: or Cc: of a post to the list. If any
address that can deliver to your list is in the qchron.com or qchron.net
domain, then yes, this will allow them all to be accepted as well as a
whole bunch more IF the address that got to the list was in a To: or Cc:
header. But, I suspect the problem in this case was that no list address
was in a To: or Cc: of the post.
This has nothing to do with who the post is From: or whether or not it is
from a list member. If a member or an acceptable non-member sends a post
To: msapiro(a)users.sourceforge.net with a Bcc: to your list, your list is
going to hold it for implicit destination.
The question you have to answer for yourself is do you want to accept
without moderator action, posts which aren't explicitly addressed in To: or
Cc: to your list or to some other address that gets to your list. If you
do, then set require_explicit_destination to No. If you don't, then set
require_explicit_destination to Yes and make sure that any 'other'
addresses that will deliver to your list are in acceptable_aliases (this
should be very few addresses).
In the later case posters will be required to explicitly name the list or
an acceptable alias in To: or Cc: or the post will be held.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 19:14
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?qchron\.(?=com$|net$).*$
posted in the acceptable_aliases. Will this allow all aliases to the mail
list to pass?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 18:48
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
Re: your followup.
You have several choices, but adding ^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$ to acceptable
aliases isn't one of them.
The post was held because it wasn't explicitly addressed To: (or Cc:) the
list. I.e. the canonical list posting address, say listname(a)example.com,
was not in To: or Cc:. Maybe it was a Bcc: to the list. Maybe the post was
addressed to listname(a)mail.example.com.
If the former, and you can't convince to poster to explicitly address the
list, then you have to turn off require_explicit_destination. If the
latter, you can add listname(a)mail.example.com to acceptable aliases.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 18:40
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
So the message is held for implicit destination which means two things:
1) It passed your accept_these_nonmembers test.
2) It was held because Privacy Options...->Recipient
filters->require_explicit_destination is Yes and the list posting address
or another address in the acceptable_aliases list was not found in any To:
or Cc: header of the post.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 18:39
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
ok so i looked this up. Does this mean I should turn off
require_explicit_destination OR should i add ^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$ to the
acceptable_aliases?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 18:30
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
Vetta log
Feb 13 12:57:25 2007 (13626) Editors post from emeeks(a)comptroller.nyc.gov
held,
message-id=<9634B41B9ED66B44AAC9674F95755AAB035518AE(a)smex03.comptroller.nycnet>:
Message has implicit destination
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 17:03
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
It works for me in current mailman, and the only changes to
Mailman/Handlers/Moderate since 2.1.3 have to do with allowing a list
specified nonmember_rejection_notice. The only other change since 2.1.2 was
to accept posts from the news->mail gateway.
Are you sure these posts aren't being held for some other reason. What
does Mailman's vette log give as the hold reason.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1667570&group_…
Bugs item #1667570, was opened at 2007-02-23 19:07
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by qchrontech
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1667570&group_…
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: security/privacy
Group: 2.1 (stable)
Status: Closed
Resolution: Invalid
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: RegExp not working in 2.1.5
Initial Comment:
Under "accept_these_nonmembers (privacy): List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted." I have the following RegExp's and I still continue to receive notices as the admin to approve the email from addresses listed below. I tested the RegExp to make sure that the e-mail addresses are successfully matched and they are. I believe in 2.1.2 this was working fine with the same RegExp.
List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted.
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?qchron\.(?=com$|net$).*$
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$
post from emeeks(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
post from ahutchi(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
post from jsimmon(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
I saw no previous bug reports on this and am unsure if this is fixed in 2.1.9 so I submitted it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 22:14
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?qchron\.(?=com$|net$).*$
posted in the acceptable_aliases. Will this allow all aliases to the mail
list to pass?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 21:48
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
Re: your followup.
You have several choices, but adding ^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$ to acceptable
aliases isn't one of them.
The post was held because it wasn't explicitly addressed To: (or Cc:) the
list. I.e. the canonical list posting address, say listname(a)example.com,
was not in To: or Cc:. Maybe it was a Bcc: to the list. Maybe the post was
addressed to listname(a)mail.example.com.
If the former, and you can't convince to poster to explicitly address the
list, then you have to turn off require_explicit_destination. If the
latter, you can add listname(a)mail.example.com to acceptable aliases.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 21:40
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
So the message is held for implicit destination which means two things:
1) It passed your accept_these_nonmembers test.
2) It was held because Privacy Options...->Recipient
filters->require_explicit_destination is Yes and the list posting address
or another address in the acceptable_aliases list was not found in any To:
or Cc: header of the post.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 21:39
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
ok so i looked this up. Does this mean I should turn off
require_explicit_destination OR should i add ^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$ to the
acceptable_aliases?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 21:30
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
Vetta log
Feb 13 12:57:25 2007 (13626) Editors post from emeeks(a)comptroller.nyc.gov
held,
message-id=<9634B41B9ED66B44AAC9674F95755AAB035518AE(a)smex03.comptroller.nycnet>:
Message has implicit destination
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 20:03
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
It works for me in current mailman, and the only changes to
Mailman/Handlers/Moderate since 2.1.3 have to do with allowing a list
specified nonmember_rejection_notice. The only other change since 2.1.2 was
to accept posts from the news->mail gateway.
Are you sure these posts aren't being held for some other reason. What
does Mailman's vette log give as the hold reason.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1667570&group_…
Bugs item #1667570, was opened at 2007-02-23 16:07
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by msapiro
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1667570&group_…
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: security/privacy
Group: 2.1 (stable)
Status: Closed
Resolution: Invalid
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: RegExp not working in 2.1.5
Initial Comment:
Under "accept_these_nonmembers (privacy): List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted." I have the following RegExp's and I still continue to receive notices as the admin to approve the email from addresses listed below. I tested the RegExp to make sure that the e-mail addresses are successfully matched and they are. I believe in 2.1.2 this was working fine with the same RegExp.
List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted.
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?qchron\.(?=com$|net$).*$
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$
post from emeeks(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
post from ahutchi(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
post from jsimmon(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
I saw no previous bug reports on this and am unsure if this is fixed in 2.1.9 so I submitted it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 18:48
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
Re: your followup.
You have several choices, but adding ^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$ to acceptable
aliases isn't one of them.
The post was held because it wasn't explicitly addressed To: (or Cc:) the
list. I.e. the canonical list posting address, say listname(a)example.com,
was not in To: or Cc:. Maybe it was a Bcc: to the list. Maybe the post was
addressed to listname(a)mail.example.com.
If the former, and you can't convince to poster to explicitly address the
list, then you have to turn off require_explicit_destination. If the
latter, you can add listname(a)mail.example.com to acceptable aliases.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 18:40
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
So the message is held for implicit destination which means two things:
1) It passed your accept_these_nonmembers test.
2) It was held because Privacy Options...->Recipient
filters->require_explicit_destination is Yes and the list posting address
or another address in the acceptable_aliases list was not found in any To:
or Cc: header of the post.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 18:39
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
ok so i looked this up. Does this mean I should turn off
require_explicit_destination OR should i add ^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$ to
the acceptable_aliases?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 18:30
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
Vetta log
Feb 13 12:57:25 2007 (13626) Editors post from emeeks(a)comptroller.nyc.gov
held,
message-id=<9634B41B9ED66B44AAC9674F95755AAB035518AE(a)smex03.comptroller.nycnet>:
Message has implicit destination
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 17:03
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
It works for me in current mailman, and the only changes to
Mailman/Handlers/Moderate since 2.1.3 have to do with allowing a list
specified nonmember_rejection_notice. The only other change since 2.1.2
was to accept posts from the news->mail gateway.
Are you sure these posts aren't being held for some other reason. What
does Mailman's vette log give as the hold reason.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1667570&group_…
Bugs item #1667570, was opened at 2007-02-23 16:07
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by msapiro
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1667570&group_…
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: security/privacy
Group: 2.1 (stable)
>Status: Closed
>Resolution: Invalid
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: RegExp not working in 2.1.5
Initial Comment:
Under "accept_these_nonmembers (privacy): List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted." I have the following RegExp's and I still continue to receive notices as the admin to approve the email from addresses listed below. I tested the RegExp to make sure that the e-mail addresses are successfully matched and they are. I believe in 2.1.2 this was working fine with the same RegExp.
List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted.
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?qchron\.(?=com$|net$).*$
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$
post from emeeks(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
post from ahutchi(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
post from jsimmon(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
I saw no previous bug reports on this and am unsure if this is fixed in 2.1.9 so I submitted it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 18:40
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
So the message is held for implicit destination which means two things:
1) It passed your accept_these_nonmembers test.
2) It was held because Privacy Options...->Recipient
filters->require_explicit_destination is Yes and the list posting address
or another address in the acceptable_aliases list was not found in any To:
or Cc: header of the post.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 18:39
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
ok so i looked this up. Does this mean I should turn off
require_explicit_destination OR should i add ^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$ to the
acceptable_aliases?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 18:30
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
Vetta log
Feb 13 12:57:25 2007 (13626) Editors post from emeeks(a)comptroller.nyc.gov
held,
message-id=<9634B41B9ED66B44AAC9674F95755AAB035518AE(a)smex03.comptroller.nycnet>:
Message has implicit destination
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 17:03
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
It works for me in current mailman, and the only changes to
Mailman/Handlers/Moderate since 2.1.3 have to do with allowing a list
specified nonmember_rejection_notice. The only other change since 2.1.2 was
to accept posts from the news->mail gateway.
Are you sure these posts aren't being held for some other reason. What
does Mailman's vette log give as the hold reason.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1667570&group_…
Bugs item #1667570, was opened at 2007-02-23 19:07
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by qchrontech
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1667570&group_…
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: security/privacy
Group: 2.1 (stable)
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: RegExp not working in 2.1.5
Initial Comment:
Under "accept_these_nonmembers (privacy): List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted." I have the following RegExp's and I still continue to receive notices as the admin to approve the email from addresses listed below. I tested the RegExp to make sure that the e-mail addresses are successfully matched and they are. I believe in 2.1.2 this was working fine with the same RegExp.
List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted.
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?qchron\.(?=com$|net$).*$
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$
post from emeeks(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
post from ahutchi(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
post from jsimmon(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
I saw no previous bug reports on this and am unsure if this is fixed in 2.1.9 so I submitted it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 21:39
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
ok so i looked this up. Does this mean I should turn off
require_explicit_destination OR should i add ^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$ to the
acceptable_aliases?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 21:30
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
Vetta log
Feb 13 12:57:25 2007 (13626) Editors post from emeeks(a)comptroller.nyc.gov
held,
message-id=<9634B41B9ED66B44AAC9674F95755AAB035518AE(a)smex03.comptroller.nycnet>:
Message has implicit destination
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 20:03
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
It works for me in current mailman, and the only changes to
Mailman/Handlers/Moderate since 2.1.3 have to do with allowing a list
specified nonmember_rejection_notice. The only other change since 2.1.2 was
to accept posts from the news->mail gateway.
Are you sure these posts aren't being held for some other reason. What
does Mailman's vette log give as the hold reason.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1667570&group_…
Bugs item #1667570, was opened at 2007-02-23 19:07
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by qchrontech
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1667570&group_…
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: security/privacy
Group: 2.1 (stable)
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: RegExp not working in 2.1.5
Initial Comment:
Under "accept_these_nonmembers (privacy): List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted." I have the following RegExp's and I still continue to receive notices as the admin to approve the email from addresses listed below. I tested the RegExp to make sure that the e-mail addresses are successfully matched and they are. I believe in 2.1.2 this was working fine with the same RegExp.
List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted.
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?qchron\.(?=com$|net$).*$
^[^@]+@(.*\.)?nyc\.gov$
post from emeeks(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
post from ahutchi(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
post from jsimmon(a)comptroller.nyc.gov requires approval
I saw no previous bug reports on this and am unsure if this is fixed in 2.1.9 so I submitted it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Michael O (qchrontech)
Date: 2007-02-23 21:30
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1631912
Originator: YES
Vetta log
Feb 13 12:57:25 2007 (13626) Editors post from emeeks(a)comptroller.nyc.gov
held,
message-id=<9634B41B9ED66B44AAC9674F95755AAB035518AE(a)smex03.comptroller.nycnet>:
Message has implicit destination
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Mark Sapiro (msapiro)
Date: 2007-02-23 20:03
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1123998
Originator: NO
It works for me in current mailman, and the only changes to
Mailman/Handlers/Moderate since 2.1.3 have to do with allowing a list
specified nonmember_rejection_notice. The only other change since 2.1.2
was to accept posts from the news->mail gateway.
Are you sure these posts aren't being held for some other reason. What
does Mailman's vette log give as the hold reason.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=1667570&group_…