Re: [Nmh-workers] scan %{body} bug?

[Valdis . Kletnieks]

On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 22:15:17 -0400, Ken Hornstein said:
> > Looking at things ... it may be a simple fix, actually.  I wasn't
> > envisioning any changes to m_getfld(), that's for sure.
>
> Alright, I think I've got a fix in there, and I've got a test which exercises
> the bug.  I was right that the fix was simple, but I had to take into
> account all of the ways that scansbr.c was used.  The only downside is that
> scan may sometimes do an extra read() when it doesn't have to, but that would
> only happen if your headers approach the 4k mark (like Steve's).

Confirming fixed - did a 'git pull' this morning, built and installed.  I was 
tripping over
the bug about 2% of e-mails.  Ran about 10,000 e-mails through a quick 'scan | 
awk'
test with zero fails (would have been about 200 or so before the fix).

pgpxLiTJ0cXHw.pgp
Description: PGP signature