Re: notmuch new: emails with BOM are ignored

diff --git a/0a/3c05d08cc3223354b037aae62d52c855fab4d7 b/0a/3c05d08cc3223354b037aae62d52c855fab4d7
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..72406e4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/0a/3c05d08cc3223354b037aae62d52c855fab4d7
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+Return-Path: <david@tethera.net>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D21F431FBC\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue, 27 May 2014 16:34:52 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: 0\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none]\r
+       autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id rVVClWHHGcUJ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Tue, 27 May 2014 16:34:46 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from yantan.tethera.net (yantan.tethera.net [199.188.72.155])\r
+       (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 994A2431FB6\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue, 27 May 2014 16:34:46 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from remotemail by yantan.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.80)\r
+       (envelope-from <david@tethera.net>)\r
+       id 1WpQtD-00033S-Bh; Tue, 27 May 2014 20:34:39 -0300\r
+Received: (nullmailer pid 21083 invoked by uid 1000); Tue, 27 May 2014\r
+       23:34:35 -0000\r
+From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>\r
+To: Andreas Amann <a.amann@ucc.ie>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: notmuch new: emails with BOM are ignored\r
+In-Reply-To: <874n0b4o16.fsf@msstf091.ucc.ie>\r
+References: <874n0b4o16.fsf@msstf091.ucc.ie>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1\r
+       (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 20:34:35 -0300\r
+Message-ID: <878upmn6d0.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 23:34:52 -0000\r
+\r
+Andreas Amann <a.amann@ucc.ie> writes:\r
+\r
+>\r
+> Could this be a bug in notmuch? Possible emails with BOM are not "legal"\r
+> anyhow, but in my opinion it would be better to simply ignore the BOM.\r
+>\r
+> I am using notmuch 0.18.\r
+\r
+As of 0.18 notmuch is using the gmime mail parser exclusively. It could be a\r
+bug/feature of the gmime library that it rejects such files.\r
+\r
+I've tagged this as a wishlist bug / feature request for now, until\r
+somebody has a chance to track down where exactly the issue is, and how\r
+hard it would be to fix.\r
+\r
+d\r