From: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>
To: Jeffrey Ollie <jeff@ocjtech.us>
In-Reply-To: <935ead450911272237l6dd8712hae8de5c638b4b2aa@mail.gmail.com>
References: <935ead450911271709p3924d929n15e743c26704ecbe@mail.gmail.com>
	<873a3ztc3k.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>
	<935ead450911272237l6dd8712hae8de5c638b4b2aa@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 22:49:33 -0800
Message-ID: <87aay7dtz6.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
	micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Cc: Not Much Mail <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Subject: Re: [notmuch] Problems importing my mail...
Precedence: list

--=-=-=
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 00:37:07 -0600, Jeffrey Ollie <jeff@ocjtech.us> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org> wrote:
> >> Warning: Unexpected extra parts of multipart/signed. Indexing anyway.
> >
> > Oh, that's a warning I put in place because I wasn't sure if it was
> > legitimate for a multipart/signed message to have more than two
> > parts. I'd actually be interested to know if the mail is correct, (and I
> > should just eliminate the warning), or if the mail is somehow malformed
> > and the warning is correct.
>=20
> No, I think it's legitimate to have multiple parts inside of a
> multipart/signed (just very rare).

OK. Then it sounds like the warning flagged an actual bug.

What the code is trying to do is simply to avoid indexing the signature
part. It's currently doing this by skipping the second part of a
multipart/signed message. Perhaps instead it should just be skipping the
final part? (It appears that that would be correct given the example
message.)

> Yes, all of those appear to not be complete mail messages, why they
> are in one of my IMAP servers remains to be seen.

OK. I'll let you puzzle that piece out.

> Unfortunately I deleted the database and am in the process of
> recreating it with the verbose flag turned on.  So far the problem has
> not occurred again.  So if there's a real bug somewhere I'm wondering
> if there isn't a timing-related component to it.

Alright. Well, let us know if things go wrong again.

=2DCarl

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLEMf96JDdNq8qSWgRAshQAJsFBlx9kBXf0t5comu2g4zq762wlACggyPs
mPr3uxXDWrSGV5Avv0iIRxQ=
=dYOC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--