Closed
Bug 266147
Opened 20 years ago
Closed 19 years ago
Internal error when Flag::notify() ends up with an invalid or empty CC: list and no requestee in restricted bugs
Categories
(Bugzilla :: Attachments & Requests, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
Bugzilla 2.20
People
(Reporter: kiko, Assigned: LpSolit)
References
Details
Attachments
(2 files, 1 obsolete file)
7.90 KB,
patch
|
myk
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
8.07 KB,
patch
|
myk
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
When Attachment::notify() ends up with an invalid or empty CC: list (because of
the isprivate/restricted flags) and there is no requestee, we try to sendmail()
and of course, an email with no To: and no CC: list won't run. We get an
internal error and the server logs will say:
[Tue Oct 26 14:46:01 2004] [error] [client 192.168.99.6] malformed header from
script. Bad header=No recipient addresses found i:
/home/kiko/www/mybugzilla/attachment.cgi
This is sendmail returning us a bad message and us displaying it to the end-user.
The easiest fix is probably band-aiding the sendmail call to not blow up when we
have no To: and no CC:.
![]() |
Assignee | |
Comment 2•19 years ago
|
||
Attachment::notify() doesn't exist. Updating the summary accordingly.
Summary: Internal error when Attachment::notify() ends up with an invalid or empty CC: list and no requestee in restricted bugs → Internal error when Flag::notify() ends up with an invalid or empty CC: list and no requestee in restricted bugs
Comment 3•19 years ago
|
||
Is this related to bug 284590? Will it perhaps even fix bug 284590?
Comment 4•19 years ago
|
||
What's the earliest version affected? (I'm just guessing 2.18 and putting that in the version field.)
I don't think this is something we need to fix in 2.20, and I don't think it's something I'd block the release on, but it is a good idea to get all the Internal Errors fixed. It's an bad error, but I haven't heard that many people report it.
Flags: blocking2.22? → blocking2.22-
OS: Linux → All
Hardware: PC → All
Version: unspecified → 2.18
Comment 5•19 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #4)
> I don't think this is something we need to fix in 2.20, and I don't think it's
> something I'd block the release on, but it is a good idea to get all the
This decision makes an interesting situation for me. This bug is somewhat blocking bug 284590 that IS marked blocking the release.. I still think we need to fix this bug before we know if 284590 is still a problem. My bet is that it isn't but who knows.
![]() |
Assignee | |
Comment 6•19 years ago
|
||
I needed to rewrite Flag.pm a bit to correctly check whether the To: and CC: fields were both emtpy or not. As a cool side-effect, this patch also fixes bug 223420, bug 224148 and bug 251869. :)
myk, you will note that Flag::notify() now returns if there is nobody to notify.
![]() |
Assignee | |
Updated•19 years ago
|
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 2.20
Comment 7•19 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 205353 [details] [diff] [review]
patch, v1
Looks good, r=myk
Attachment #205353 -
Flags: review?(myk) → review+
![]() |
Assignee | |
Comment 8•19 years ago
|
||
ok, it needs a backport for 2.20 to fix a small bitrot.
Flags: approval?
![]() |
Assignee | |
Comment 9•19 years ago
|
||
I undo the patch from bug 256762 which is incorrect here (flag.addressee.email already has the emailsuffix appended, see Bugzilla::User::email). Moreover, I removed "'s request for" from the email template if there was no requester (if there is no requester, then there is no pending request).
Attachment #205353 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #205481 -
Flags: review?(myk)
![]() |
Assignee | |
Comment 10•19 years ago
|
||
backport based on patch v2 for tip.
Attachment #205482 -
Flags: review?(myk)
![]() |
Assignee | |
Updated•19 years ago
|
Flags: approval?
Comment 11•19 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #9)
> I undo the patch from bug 256762 which is incorrect here (flag.addressee.email
> already has the emailsuffix appended, see Bugzilla::User::email). Moreover, I
Huh? Bug 256762 should've been undone by bug 277389, shouldn't it?
![]() |
Assignee | |
Comment 12•19 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #11)
> Huh? Bug 256762 should've been undone by bug 277389, shouldn't it?
bug 277389 removed the part about the CC list. Here I remove the remaning part about the addressee. I did some tests: the template looks at User::email, not at the lines I remove here.
Comment 13•19 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 205481 [details] [diff] [review]
patch for tip, v2
Good catches. r=myk
Attachment #205481 -
Flags: review?(myk) → review+
Comment 14•19 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 205482 [details] [diff] [review]
patch for 2.20, v1
Looks good; r=myk
But one note: this comment change looks wrong to me:
>-# Frédéric Buclin <LpSolit@gmail.com>
>+# Frédéric Buclin <LpSolit@gmail.com>
It looks like you are replacing "Frederic" with the accent aigus over both e-s with strange characters (a capital A with tilde followed by a copyright sign). Are you switching to Unicode characters, and if so are you sure this is nonproblematic?
Attachment #205482 -
Flags: review?(myk) → review+
![]() |
Assignee | |
Comment 15•19 years ago
|
||
Yup, switching to UTF-8, as requested on IRC. It's working fine as several files have my name as UTF-8 already.
Flags: approval?
Flags: approval2.20?
Updated•19 years ago
|
Flags: approval?
Flags: approval2.20?
Flags: approval2.20+
Flags: approval+
![]() |
Assignee | |
Comment 16•19 years ago
|
||
tip:
Checking in Bugzilla/Flag.pm;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/Bugzilla/Flag.pm,v <-- Flag.pm
new revision: 1.58; previous revision: 1.57
done
Checking in template/en/default/request/email.txt.tmpl;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/request/email.txt.tmpl,v <-- email.txt.tmpl
new revision: 1.10; previous revision: 1.9
done
2.20:
Checking in Bugzilla/Flag.pm;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/Bugzilla/Flag.pm,v <-- Flag.pm
new revision: 1.45.2.3; previous revision: 1.45.2.2
done
Checking in template/en/default/request/email.txt.tmpl;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/request/email.txt.tmpl,v <-- email.txt.tmpl
new revision: 1.9.4.1; previous revision: 1.9
done
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 19 years ago
QA Contact: mattyt-bugzilla → default-qa
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Updated•19 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [applied to b.m.o]
Updated•18 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [applied to b.m.o]
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•