Bugs item #660733, was opened at 2003-01-01 18:29 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by followme You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=660733&group_id=103 Category: Pipermail Group: 2.1 (stable) Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 7 Submitted By: Bryan Fullerton (fehwalker) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: pipermail date handling Initial Comment: I moved my first list to mailman 2.1 and tried to re-generate the pipermail archives (just, ya know, to see how it'd work :), and got the following traceback. This is a list that's been around for a long time (archives back to 1995), and the .mbox file was generated from a majordomo/hypermail archive when it was moved to mailman 2.0 a couple of years ago. Here's a ls -l of the .mbox file: -rw-rw-r-- 1 mailman mailman 17741891 Jan 1 10:36 bryans-list.mbox Here's the traceback: Updating HTML for article 467 Updating HTML for article 468 Updating HTML for article 469 Updating HTML for article 473 Updating HTML for article 472 Pickling archive state into /home/mailman-2.1/archives/private/bryans-list/pipermail.pck Traceback (most recent call last): File "bin/arch", line 187, in ? main() File "bin/arch", line 175, in main archiver.processUnixMailbox(fp, start, end) File "/home/mailman-2.1/Mailman/Archiver/pipermail.py", line 544, in processUnixMailbox m = mbox.next() File "/usr/local/lib/python2.2/mailbox.py", line 34, in next return self.factory(_Subfile(self.fp, start, stop)) File "/home/mailman-2.1/Mailman/Mailbox.py", line 79, in scrubber return mailbox.scrub(msg) File "/home/mailman-2.1/Mailman/Mailbox.py", line 99, in scrub return self._scrubber(self._mlist, msg) File "/home/mailman-2.1/Mailman/Handlers/Scrubber.py", line 132, in process dir = calculate_attachments_dir(mlist, msg, msgdata) File "/home/mailman-2.1/Mailman/Handlers/Scrubber.py", line 93, in calculate_attachments_dir datedir = safe_strftime(fmt, now) File "/home/mailman-2.1/Mailman/Handlers/Scrubber.py", line 77, in safe_strftime return time.strftime(fmt, floatsecs) TypeError: argument must be 9-item sequence, not None I'm guessing it's a header problem in one of the messages, but I'm not sure what. Thanks, Bryan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Zoran Dzelajlija (followme) Date: 2003-12-31 16:31 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=106281 I can confirm this with 2.1.2. Is there a simple way to make arch guess dates better? I would settle for arch using the date of the previous message, but I don't know wher to start digging in the code. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Bryan Fullerton (fehwalker) Date: 2003-01-01 19:45 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=660772 After some investigation, the following (admittedly invalid) date headers cause tracebacks similar to the above. After reformatting them I'm able to generate the archive. Date: 25 Aug 95 18.00 Date: Thursday, 30 October 1997 3:02pm PT Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 Pacific Standard Time Note that these messages *didn't* cause bin/arch|pipermail in mailman 2.0.x to fail, though it probably didn't parse them properly. Perhaps trapping the error and/or skipping these messages might be more useful? It also appears that bin/arch is throwing all messages with dates it can't figure out (after the above were removed) into the current day. An example can be seen at http://lists.samurai.com/pipermail/bryans-list/2003-January/thread.html . I'm unsure if there's any way to better handle this, but just wanted to note it - I can create a separate bug report if it's important. Thanks, Bryan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100103&aid=660733&group_id=103