Your message dated Mon, 6 Feb 2006 15:17:55 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line closing old bug report has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message --->From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Jun 23 07:34:57 2002 Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Jun 2002 12:34:57 +0000 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mailout04.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.18] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 17M6a0-0006mU-00; Sun, 23 Jun 2002 07:34:56 -0500 Received: from fwd07.sul.t-online.de by mailout04.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 17M6Zy-0005nh-06; Sun, 23 Jun 2002 14:34:54 +0200 Received: from localhost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) by fmrl07.sul.t-online.com with esmtp id 17M6Zx-0KiAOeC; Sun, 23 Jun 2002 14:34:53 +0200 Received: from ksjuse by localhost with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17M6Ww-0004qe-00; Sun, 23 Jun 2002 14:31:50 +0200 From: "Kai S. Juse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: xbel-utils: adr_parse skips entries and breaks tree structure X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50 Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 14:31:46 +0200 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-BadReturnPath: [EMAIL PROTECTED] rewritten as [EMAIL PROTECTED] using "From" header Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Package: xbel-utils Version: 0.7.1-1 Severity: normal Tags: patch -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I was having a hard time converting an Opera 6 bookmark file for use with galeon until I discovered what I consider a bug in adr_parse. The output of adr_parse was missing the first bookmark entry of all folders and also seem to have hooked the bottem part of my top-level bookmarks deeper into the tree structure. As I understand from the adr_parse source, the fields "VISITED" and "ORDER" are optional. Unfortunately, the "skip of optional fiels"-logic in the script does not work [Once a line is read and recognized as not holding the expected field, it is essentially DISCARDED. It is not compared to the next possible optional field name. This results in reading to many line for a single record and missing the next one completely (w/ "swallow_rest").] Since this problem only occures for fields that are not used later on in the script (ie. parsed needlessly), I just removed the parsing entirely and leave the skipping to swallow_rest. I can report complete success with that. - --- /usr/bin/adr_parse Sun Jun 16 09:47:35 2002 +++ xbel/adr_parse Sun Jun 23 14:00:17 2002 @@ -73,8 +73,6 @@ if line=="#FOLDER": name=readfield(infile,"NAME") created=parse_date(readfield(infile,"CREATED")) - - parse_date(readfield(infile, "VISITED", 0)) # just throw this away - - order = readfield(infile, "ORDER", 0) swallow_rest(infile) bms.add_folder(name,created) @@ -83,7 +81,6 @@ url=readfield(infile,"URL") created=parse_date(readfield(infile,"CREATED")) visited=parse_date(readfield(infile, "VISITED", 0)) - - order = readfield(infile, "ORDER", 0) swallow_rest(infile) bms.add_bookmark(name,created,visited,None,url) This solution also (like the original code intended for optional fields) does not solve the problem of parsing optional fields, but it at least allows me to parse the file properly for the given purpose. Kai - -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux callisto 2.4.18 #7 Thu Apr 18 21:56:27 CEST 2002 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=de_DE Versions of packages xbel-utils depends on: ii python2.1 2.1.3-3 An interactive object-oriented scr ii python2.1-xml 0.7-1 XML tools for Python (2.1.x) ii xbel 0.7-1 XML Bookmark Exchange Language -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9Fb+20bFYwuxg7eMRAkB3AKDqEPxN7F/N/3/NT8AJGj+0NBnuBACfYThf vqPfy/FpgKT3VRSepI86wDo= =1Ypu -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --->From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Feb 06 06:18:28 2006 Received: (at 150763-done) by bugs.debian.org; 6 Feb 2006 14:18:28 +0000 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from logilab.net2.nerim.net ([62.4.19.137] helo=tucana.logilab.fr) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1F67CF-00043B-Rs for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 06 Feb 2006 06:18:28 -0800 Received: from orion.logilab.fr (scutum.logilab.fr [172.17.0.2]) by tucana.logilab.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F1C37142AA for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 6 Feb 2006 15:17:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from logilab.fr (sagittarius.logilab.fr [172.17.1.68]) by orion.logilab.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 7BA852BEA1 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 6 Feb 2006 15:17:55 +0100 (CET) Received: (nullmailer pid 4994 invoked by uid 1002); Mon, 06 Feb 2006 14:17:55 -0000 Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 15:17:55 +0100 From: Alexandre Fayolle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: closing old bug report Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="g7w8+K/95kPelPD2" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_20 autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 --g7w8+K/95kPelPD2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This bug was found on Woody and fixed in Sarge. I'm closing the bug report.=20 --=20 Alexandre Fayolle LOGILAB, Paris (France). http://www.logilab.com http://www.logilab.fr http://www.logilab.org Retrait du projet de loi DADVSI: http://eucd.info/petitions/index.php?petit= ion=3D2 --g7w8+K/95kPelPD2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iQEVAwUBQ+dak16T+PKoJ87eAQJ1PggAmIA0WxqB10bZ145jdbpqRUijEHxkypWC KE7bMOoTVOQwrw0Y6dwiXOuwy2e2wtmps06RSpF79XFTNl4N6HBZpg6RQUreN7bm 1dphKdYKxJRL4gpjuMRIc43WxrQmCiW/UM0fBCw366ZwpotM9oaQ93vELVLtvMy6 JmRyGfABX0A3fUorv6JIGjHOUpiiqHa4vqT6hv2rf2A0WDNpLhaEITFIhNttS7YW 2Z1Hhb/w+UiCaSoTV4GOZ3WBbxO+4ifkHAwhqAjfv6ubJB3W96YnngXtWGkWpIXl GwXI4Ntga/Wea7mb6jLfjtKRmaeb6l0kQM9bP6/Yp1dVQw0NmxrkOg== =IKMr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --g7w8+K/95kPelPD2--
--- End Message ---
