On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 05:04:45PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > @@ -461,6 +506,7 @@ static int check_header(struct mailinfo *mi, > > */ > > strbuf_add(&sb, line->buf + len + 2, line->len - len - > > 2); > > decode_header(mi, &sb); > > + unescape_quoted_pair(mi, &sb); > > handle_header(&hdr_data[i], &sb); > > ret = 1; > > goto check_header_out; > > I wonder why this call is only in here, not on other headers that > all call decode_header(). For that matter, I wonder if the call (or > the logic of the helper function itself) should go at the end of > decode_header(). After all, this is different kind of decoding; the > current one knows how to do b/q encoding but forgot about the more > traditional quoting done with backslash, and you are teaching the > code that the current decoding it does is insufficient and how to > handle the one that the original implementors forgot about.
It has been a while since I looked at rfc2822, but aren't the quoting and syntax rules different for addresses versus other headers? We would not want to dequote a Subject header, I think. -Peff
