Re: Emails generated by Elog, posted by Stefan Ritt on Fri Jun 5 12:34:32 2015
|
I acknowledge these two bugs and will fix them soon.
| David Pilgram wrote: |
|
I am one who received an email every time there is a new entry in this forum.
I have just noticed that since May 20, every email contains the message "An old ELOG entry has been updated: "
whereas before that date, the vast majority say "A new ELOG entry has been submitted: "
Is this something to do with the saving of draft messages?
Talking of which, I see my draft of this message shows up in the forum before I have submitted it.
|
|
|
Re: Emails generated by Elog, posted by Stefan Ritt on Tue Jun 9 12:11:19 2015
|
I fixed both issues in the current GIT version. Please double check it.
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
|
I acknowledge these two bugs and will fix them soon.
| David Pilgram wrote: |
|
I am one who received an email every time there is a new entry in this forum.
I have just noticed that since May 20, every email contains the message "An old ELOG entry has been updated: "
whereas before that date, the vast majority say "A new ELOG entry has been submitted: "
Is this something to do with the saving of draft messages?
Talking of which, I see my draft of this message shows up in the forum before I have submitted it.
|
|
|
|
Re: Emails generated by *this* discussion forum, posted by Stefan Ritt on Tue Nov 3 09:14:14 2009
|
> Hi Stefan,
>
> After 21.Oct, all the emails sent out by this discussion form now are addressed to
>
> ELOG@ananke.jtan.com
> the name of the server my mails are sent to.
>
> Before that the emails were addressed to
>
> ELOG@emix.psi.ch
>
> Obviouisly my real email address is there, in the headers (as it would appear for a BCC)
>
> The only consequence for me was these emails turned up in the wrong mailbox, but perhaps it has wider implications?
Indeed on Oct. 21st the SMPT server sending out emails from this forum has been changed. I checked my own mails coming
from the forum, but I could not find any hint of what you describe above. The "From:" header contains "noreply@psi.ch"
and the "To:" header is my email address. The "Received:" header contains our SMTP server, but you should not that field
for filtering your email.
- Stefan |
|
Re: Email substitution quit working, posted by David Spindler on Tue Sep 5 15:59:47 2006
|
| David Spindler wrote: | I have recently upgraded from the 2.6.0-beta (I believe) to 2.6.2-1699. I just found out that on the day I upgraded, email substitution has stopped working. I have checked the discussion area and all the documentation and do not see any clues. The debug_log.txt file shows that the emails are being processed, but the fields are not being substituted correctly.
Thanks, in advance for any help,
David
|
I have not been able to find anything wrong in my config file, so I replaced 2.6.2 with 2.6.1 (apparently that was what I was running last, not the 2.6.0-beta) and my troubles have disappeared.
Anybody have any idea what has happened? |
|
Re: Email substitution quit working, posted by Stefan Ritt on Fri Sep 22 08:50:08 2006
|
| David Spindler wrote: |
| David Spindler wrote: | I have recently upgraded from the 2.6.0-beta (I believe) to 2.6.2-1699. I just found out that on the day I upgraded, email substitution has stopped working. I have checked the discussion area and all the documentation and do not see any clues. The debug_log.txt file shows that the emails are being processed, but the fields are not being substituted correctly.
Thanks, in advance for any help,
David
|
I have not been able to find anything wrong in my config file, so I replaced 2.6.2 with 2.6.1 (apparently that was what I was running last, not the 2.6.0-beta) and my troubles have disappeared.
Anybody have any idea what has happened? |
This problem has been fixed in revision 1712. So I made an 2.6.2-2 for the Windows community just now. Please upgrade. |
|
Re: Email subject garbaged when set?, posted by Stefan Ritt on Thu Aug 4 22:59:12 2005
|
| Chris Green wrote: | The email I get has:
Subject:
=?ISO-8859-1?B?W0Jvb05FLUVMT0ddIE5ldyBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIHRvIENoYXJnZWQgQ3Vyc
mVudCBQaSBQbHVzIGZyb20gQ2hyaXMgR3JlZW4=?=
... which isn't particularly illuminating. |
This is the BASE64 encoding of the subject. It was discussed here and I implemented it according to RFC2047. All subjects I receive look fine in Outlook and Thunderbird, but not under Pine, which apparently does not implement the RFC correctly. One could of course put a switch into elog to encode it or not. But as soon as you want to send some non-ASCII characters (like the Norwegian as described in the thread mentioned above) you have a problem. Maybe you can configure your email client correctly to interprete the encoded subject? |
|
Re: Email subject garbaged when set?, posted by Chris Green on Fri Aug 5 01:13:13 2005
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| Chris Green wrote: | The email I get has:
Subject:
=?ISO-8859-1?B?W0Jvb05FLUVMT0ddIE5ldyBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIHRvIENoYXJnZWQgQ3Vyc
mVudCBQaSBQbHVzIGZyb20gQ2hyaXMgR3JlZW4=?=
... which isn't particularly illuminating. |
This is the BASE64 encoding of the subject. It was discussed here and I implemented it according to RFC2047. All subjects I receive look fine in Outlook and Thunderbird, but not under Pine, which apparently does not implement the RFC correctly. One could of course put a switch into elog to encode it or not. But as soon as you want to send some non-ASCII characters (like the Norwegian as described in the thread mentioned above) you have a problem. Maybe you can configure your email client correctly to interprete the encoded subject? |
Apparently the pine people think they're implementing it correctly. Indeed the default subject, "[ISO-8859-1] New ELOG entry" appears just fine. The one for membership confirmation, and anything set in Use Email Subject, however, is borked as above. Maybe the pine bug is something that can be worked around with something simple (like spaces after the ISO spec, or something? Some things work just fine, as I said.
Thanks,
Chris. |
|
Re: Email subject garbaged when set?, posted by Heiko Scheit on Fri Aug 5 11:18:08 2005
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| Chris Green wrote: | The email I get has:
Subject:
=?ISO-8859-1?B?W0Jvb05FLUVMT0ddIE5ldyBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIHRvIENoYXJnZWQgQ3Vyc
mVudCBQaSBQbHVzIGZyb20gQ2hyaXMgR3JlZW4=?=
... which isn't particularly illuminating. |
This is the BASE64 encoding of the subject. It was discussed here and I implemented it according to RFC2047. |
Well not quite. According to the RFC the encoded word must not be longer than 75 characters! Indeed
shorter subjects are displayed by pine, but not longer ones as they do not follow RFC2047.
Below is the quote from the RFC.
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
All subjects I receive look fine in Outlook and Thunderbird, but not under Pine, which apparently does not implement the RFC correctly.
|
Actually pine implements it correctly but not elogd 
The relevant text from the RFC
An 'encoded-word' may not be more than 75 characters long, including
'charset', 'encoding', 'encoded-text', and delimiters. If it is
desirable to encode more text than will fit in an 'encoded-word' of
75 characters, multiple 'encoded-word's (separated by CRLF SPACE) may
be used.
|