252041 - run filter now with filter condition on priority broken on imap

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(MailNews Core :: Filters, defect)

Description

[Michael]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8a2) Gecko/20040714 MultiZilla/1.6.4.0b
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8a2) Gecko/20040714 MultiZilla/1.6.4.0b

Message filters do not work.

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Opened message filters from tools menue.
2. created an email message filter
3. I clicked run now button - It does nothing

Actual Results:  
It did not filter anything

Expected Results:  
try to fix it.

Comment 1

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

You're going to need to be a lot more specific if you want this bug fixed.

What exactly is the rule in the filter?  Are you sure you have messages that 
match the filter in the folder?  Are you sure you've got the right folder 
selected in the dialog when you click Run Now?

Comment 2

[Miguel]

This only happens with IMAP accounts. Trying to click "Run now" produces this
error in the JavaScript console:

Error: uncaught exception: [Exception... "Component returned failure code:
0x80070057 (NS_ERROR_ILLEGAL_VALUE) [nsIMsgFilterService.applyFiltersToFolders]"
 nsresult: "0x80070057 (NS_ERROR_ILLEGAL_VALUE)"  location: "JS frame ::
chrome://messenger/content/FilterListDialog.js :: runSelectedFilters :: line
418"  data: no]

Comment 3

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

What is the definition of the filter?  What criteria, what actions?

Comment 4

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

Also: which IMAP delete model are you using?

Comment 5

[Miguel]

I don't know what filter is using the reporter (Michael
<mpowellATrogershsaDOTcom>) --We are not the same person, as you may have
noticed--, but mine is very simple: Label as Important the messages with a
priority higher than normal.

Comment 6

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

Michael Powell, I'm confirming this bug based on the details provided in 
comment 2.  If that report doesn't match your experience, please open a new bug 
for your problem and provide more detail.

Michael Lopez (do I have that right?) I can duplicate your symptom easily, down 
to the text of the exception.  The filter runs OK when the message arrives in 
the Inbox.  However, if I unlabel it and attempt to run the filter on the IMAP 
Inbox or another IMAP folder using the Message Filter dialog's Run Now button, I 
get the same exception you reported.

If I select Tools|Run Filters on Folder (either in the Inbox or another folder) 
I get the exception reported in bug 253368.

Comment 7

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

Whoops, forgot: I reproduced this with
  Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8a3) Gecko/20040824

Comment 8

[David :Bienvenu]

taking, changing summary to reflect my understanding of the bug...

Comment 9

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

Not just Inbox; any folder.
Appears to be related to accessing the Priority field in the filter criteria.
Also reproduced with
  Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803

Comment 10

[David :Bienvenu]

ah, yes, if this is about priority, then that's not surprising. Filter after the
fact searches on the imap server, and you can't do a search based on priority on
the imap server (or we don't encode it correctly...).

Comment 11

[Miguel]

I've also checked it and filters work correctly if I don't access the priority.

And yes Mike, you've it right, my surname is 'Lopez'  ;-) Thanks for your reply,
I was already thinking nobody was having a look at all this stuff about filters
and IMAP, and the more I was able to do was to verify all my problems with
filters and try someone with persmissions had a look at the bug reports

Comment 12

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

*** Bug 253368 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 13

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

*** Bug 296519 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 14

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

do you still see this problem?

Comment 15

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

(In reply to comment #14)
> do you still see this problem?

I do not (TB 2b1-1202).  I believe this was fixed from the patch in 
attachment 241431 [details] [diff] [review] (at bug 146075) which has actually been checked in 
since mid-October; I guess that's why Wayne asked the question.  :)