Closed Bug 192877 Opened 22 years ago Closed 22 years ago

State changes on bugs w/ dependancies cause "Use of uninitialized values"

Categories

(Bugzilla :: Email Notifications, defect, P1)

2.17.3
defect

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
Bugzilla 2.18

People

(Reporter: justdave, Assigned: preed)

References

Details

Attachments

(1 file, 2 obsolete files)

Getting this in my error logs on bugscape

[Tue Feb 11 17:45:04 2003] process_bug.cgi: Use of uninitialized value in string
eq at Bugzilla/BugMail.pm line 780.
*** Bug 192879 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I'm looking at error logs on landfill, and I'm seeing this also in line 790 (as
well as 780):

[Tue Feb 11 12:56:54 2003] process_bug.cgi: Use of uninitialized value in string
eq at Bugzilla/BugMail.pm line 780.
[Tue Feb 11 12:56:54 2003] process_bug.cgi: Use of uninitialized value in string
ne at Bugzilla/BugMail.pm line 790.

This code looks to have been added as part of bug 24789.

Justdave: can you confirm that these errors were *not* appearing before bug
124174 was checked in?
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Priority: -- → P1
Summary: Use of uninitialized value in string eq at Bugzilla/BugMail.pm line 780. → Use of uninitialized values Bugzilla/BugMail.pm
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 2.18
Oh, could you also see if you can find a way to reproduce?

I can't seem to get it to fire on just adding a comment or changing fields on
any old bug, so...
no, because:
a) Bugzilla/BugMail.pm didn't exist prior to that checkin
b) we apparently weren't trapping stderr from processmail
Steps to repro:

1. Create a new bug.
2. Enter a dependancy (a blocking bug)
3. Accept the bug
4. Resolve the bug (you should see it here)
5. Reopen the bug (you should see it here, too).
Summary: Use of uninitialized values Bugzilla/BugMail.pm → State changes on bugs w/ dependancies cause "Use of uninitialized values"
Attached patch v1 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Fixes the "uninitialized value" errors. 

Looks to be an original bug from bug 24789; if we're creating a mail for a
dependant bug, we're not going to be changing the estimated/time remaining
fields on the *dependent* bugs and those fields aren't present on dep bugs.
Attachment #114529 - Flags: review?
Attached patch v2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Make the patch actually make sense (just for bbaetz ;-)
Attachment #114529 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #114532 - Flags: review?(bbaetz)
Attachment #114529 - Flags: review?
Attached patch Simpler fixSplinter Review
Ok... this is the simpler (and probably most correct... which is... good)
version of this patch.
Attachment #114532 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Comment on attachment 114534 [details] [diff] [review]
Simpler fix

There are some whitespace issues with this patch; it'll be fixed for checkin...
but the concept should be clear.
Attachment #114534 - Flags: review?
Attachment #114532 - Flags: review?(bbaetz)
Comment on attachment 114534 [details] [diff] [review]
Simpler fix

yeah, looks pretty obvious.
Attachment #114534 - Flags: review? → review+
Flags: approval?
Flags: approval? → approval+
Checking in BugMail.pm;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/Bugzilla/BugMail.pm,v  <--  BugMail.pm
new revision: 1.2; previous revision: 1.1
done
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 22 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
QA Contact: matty_is_a_geek → default-qa
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: