Can this be implemented now in anyway?(CFSCRIPT?)
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
Use the javax.mail construct for internet address. Wrap that in a
try-catch and there's your validation.
-Dov
_
From: Tim Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 4:05 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re:CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
Raymond,
Can you
Can you recommend the best way of checking the email
first?... CFMX does not provide the same function that CFMAIL
uses to validate.I have ran into many instances where tags
from the CF Exchange pass emails (ISEmailResult, etc), and
CFMAIL MX crashes.
www.cflib.org/udf.cfm/isEmail
On Wednesday, January 21, 2004, at 06:28PM, Matt Robertson wrote:
But I hope someone smacked themselves on the head and at the very,
*very* least said Oops. Lets try not do *that* again! when the
realization hit that this change was undocumented and unannounced
(assuming I am not
On Tuesday 20 Jan 2004 18:13 pm, Matt Robertson wrote:
Can't.Politics.
Bah :-)
--
Tom Chiverton
Advanced ColdFusion Programmer
Tel: +44(0)1749 834997
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BlueFinger Limited
Underwood Business Park
Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF
Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900
Fax: +44 (0)1749
Some things I feel I must point out.
1. Data Integrity is always an issue but why should I waste my precious cpu
time checking first what the tag is already checking.If this was truly
intentional I would think that the devs at Macromedia would have built in a
little more reverse
to decide what happened.
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Tyler Clendenin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 10:18 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
Some things I feel I must point out.
1. Data Integrity is always an issue but why should I
1. Data Integrity is always an issue but why should I waste
my precious cpu time checking first what the tag is already
checking. If this was truly intentional I would think that
the devs at Macromedia would have built in a little more
reverse compatibility, Maybe some sort of attributes
]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 10:25 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
Re #1: Doesn't putting a try/catch around the cfmail do the
trick?That way
you don't have to validate the email yourself... just let cfmail
fail if it
wants to.
If you put the try
Re #1: Doesn't putting a try/catch around the cfmail do the
trick? That way you don't have to validate the email yourself...
just let cfmail fail if it wants to.
If you put the try/catch around the entire cfloop (or cfoutput)
of a query then Yes, it will abort the whole job. But if you
Tyler,
2) so why don't you CFLOOP query=, and cfmail inside the loop to solve
this?
-Dov
_
From: Tyler Clendenin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 10:18 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
Some things I feel I must point out
The proper way to do this is to perform the syntax check yourself, and
only call CFMAIL if necessary.If anything, CFMX should be kind enough
to add a new function isValidEmail() since most webapps do it pretty
often.
Does cflib count?
http://www.cflib.org/udf.cfm?ID=216
Nick
[Todays
Warning:Doing all the try-catches is once again relying on
CF behavior which we all witnessed changing without notice
(rightfully so).
The proper way to do this is to perform the syntax check
yourself, and only call CFMAIL if necessary. If anything,
CFMX should be kind enough to add a
Obviously. I was directing this comment it to the user who might just
type cfcatch and think his problems were over.
-dov
_
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 10:53 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL
Dave Watts wrote:
...snip...when you're using a query with
your CFMAIL tag itself...snip...
if any record within that recordset has an invalid address,
the whole thing will fail at that point.
Exactly my situation.An external database with cfmail running with
query=.
Two choices:
1)do a pre-mail
Obviously. I was directing this comment it to the user who
might just type cfcatch and think his problems were over.
That would never be an appropriate way to use CFCATCH; rather than
suggesting that people not use it, I would rather it be used correctly.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
.
Tyler Clendenin
GSL Solutions
_
From: Katz, Dov B (IT) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 10:39 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
Tyler,
2) so why don't you CFLOOP query=, and cfmail inside the loop to solve
this?
-Dov
_
From
, January 21, 2004 9:44 AM
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
Re #1: Doesn't putting a try/catch around the cfmail do the
trick? That way you don't have to validate the email yourself...
just let cfmail fail if it wants to.
If you put the try/catch around the entire cfloop
ActivMail is at http://www.cfdev.com .It just works.
Tyler Clendenin
GSL Solutions
_
From: Deanna Schneider [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 11:59 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
I've handled this by looping over my query, doing
: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 10:44 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
Re #1: Doesn't putting a try/catch around the cfmail do the
trick? That way you don't have to validate the email yourself...
just let cfmail fail if it wants
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 12:11 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
Well overall better then crashing is spending more money on something like
cfx_activmail that just works. That is my major gripe, why can't these
things just work. Even
, January 21, 2004 2:34 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
That is my major gripe, why can't these things just work.
Because what to you is 'just working' is to a bunch of other
people 'hiding
an import error'.
If you have CFMX 6.1 mail spooling problems, I would look
On Wednesday, January 21, 2004, at 10:18AM, Tyler Clendenin wrote:
My main problem with this is that if you send to a query and it throws
an
error it stops mid e-mail and does not rollback or anything it only
sends
out the first percentage of the e-mail before the bad e-mail address.
Do
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 2:34 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
That is my major gripe, why can't these things just work.
Because what to you is 'just working' is to a bunch of other people 'hiding
an import error'.
If you have CFMX 6.1 mail
: Re: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
On Wednesday, January 21, 2004, at 10:18AM, Tyler Clendenin
wrote:
My main problem with this is that if you send to a query and
it throws
an
error it stops mid e-mail and does not rollback or anything it
only
sends
out the first percentage
Duh, it returns a boolean... you get the point... -Dov
_
From: Katz, Dov B (IT)
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 2:57 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: (CFMX RFE) RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
Here's my informal CFMX RFE based on this discussion:
1) add a new string function
, 2004 2:41 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
On Wednesday, January 21, 2004, at 10:18AM, Tyler Clendenin wrote:
My main problem with this is that if you send to a query and it throws
an
error it stops mid e-mail and does not rollback or anything it only
sends
out
Tom Jordahl said:
Because what to you is 'just working' is to a bunch of other people
'hiding an import error'.
+1
I do have an enhancement on my plate to batch bad addresses when
running cfmail over a query.We know this is a problem many users
encounter. We just have to figure out how the
On Wednesday, January 21, 2004, at 02:54PM, Tyler Clendenin wrote:
so you see no forseeable performance issue with looping over using the
query?
I wouldn't think so.I would guess that's what is happening internally
anyway.Perhaps Tom can clarify.
also does the validator follow all rfc822
Yes.We realize that the behavior is inconsistent with previous
versions of ColdFusion, however we believe the new behavior exhibited
by CFMX is preferable.
I agree. But I also think MM failed to inform developers up to the level
that such a change would require.
PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
so you see no forseeable performance issue with looping over using the
query?also does the validator follow all rfc822 standards such as quoted
identifiers.and in clarification, this behavoir is a new improvement and
not a bug?
Tyler
Christian wrote:
I think once you have completed the required re-factoring,
you will find that your application is actually more
robust.
Absolutely.
But I hope someone smacked themselves on the head and at the very, *very* least said Oops.Lets try not do *that* again!when the realization hit
I'm checking with the engineering team.I'll let you know what I hear.
Christian
On Tuesday, January 20, 2004, at 11:14AM, Matt Robertson wrote:
Well, it was about time... Finally upgraded my CF 4.5 server to 6.1.
Had minimal problems, and really nothing unexpected, except for this
one
On Tuesday 20 Jan 2004 16:14 pm, Matt Robertson wrote:
showstopper:
It's not a bug in CFMX, but rather your app.
If your app thinks foo@ bar.com or foo@@bar.com is a valid email address
and lets someone enter it, your app is broke.
--
Tom Chiverton
Advanced ColdFusion Programmer
Tel:
Thanks Christian,
I'm getting burned hard over this by a very large client.We were about
to set them up with their own dedicated CF cluster and this hit.Made
all the political opponents in the organization came out of the
woodwork.
Did some more looking.Looks like its been griped about here
Here is the error I get:
Attribute validation error for tag CFMAIL.
The value of the attribute to, which is currently tomj@ macromedia.com, is invalid.
Which is the correct thing - the attribute is invalid.Nothing is crashing.
--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia Server Development
PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 11:33 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
Thanks Christian,
I'm getting burned hard over this by a very large client.We
were about
to set them up with their own dedicated CF cluster and this hit.
Made
all
respect that.
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Chiverton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 20 January 2004 16:31
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
On Tuesday 20 Jan 2004 16:14 pm, Matt Robertson wrote:
showstopper:
It's not a bug in CFMX, but rather your app
On Tuesday 20 Jan 2004 16:57 pm, Adam Reynolds wrote:
Thomas,
Technically it is a bug. Cfmail should not throw an exception when passed
an email address (no matter what the content) Particularly if this is a new
bug introduced into 6.1
It wasn't being passed an email address though, was it,
Technically it is a bug. Cfmail should not throw an exception
when passed an email address (no matter what the content)
Particularly if this is a new bug introduced into 6.1
I disagree with this. I think that this behavior is in some ways preferable
to previous behavior. I also think that
Tom Jordahl wrote:
Which is the correct thing - the attribute is invalid.Nothing is
crashing.
The app is crashing due to undocumented, changed behavior.You might
consider documenting it.
So now, under CFMX, I must wrap any cfmail statement in a validator or a
special try/catch to keep it from
Adam Reynolds wrote:
Technically it is a bug. Cfmail should not throw an exception when passed an
email address (no matter what the content)
But the whole point is that it wasn't passed an email address.
Jochem
--
I don't get it
immigrants don't work
and steal our jobs
- Loesje
[Todays
Incorrect. You simply need to check the email address first. This is best
done one time - so do it before inserting it into the DB.
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
Dave Watts wrote:
You should be able to fix this pretty quickly by wrapping your
CFMAIL tag within an exception handler.
Yes.Fortunately I have few uses of this tag where the data is outside
normal validation.
I can't do it before db insertion because its not my data.
I'll write a try/catch
IMHO, CF fixed the bug in 6.1 by making it enforce the IETF email
address standards...Relying on thebug in previous versions was a
mistake. :)
-dov
_
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 12:14 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash
On Tuesday 20 Jan 2004 17:12 pm, Matt Robertson wrote:
So now, under CFMX, I must wrap any cfmail statement in a validator or a
special try/catch to keep it from potentially crashing my app.OK.Got
it.
Umm, no, you should validate user input before acting on it.
Idealy at entry time. The same
On Tuesday 20 Jan 2004 17:27 pm, Matt Robertson wrote:
I can't do it before db insertion because its not my data.
Even better then :-)
Spend 2 seconds knocking up a cfloop over all your data and testing the
email address field.
Then take the list of failues to the data provider and give them
: Re: CFMX 'bug'? Easy to crash CFMAIL.
On Tuesday 20 Jan 2004 17:27 pm, Matt Robertson wrote:
I can't do it before db insertion because its not my data.
Even better then :-)
Spend 2 seconds knocking up a cfloop over all your data and testing
the
email address field.
--
Tom Chiverton
Advanced
On Tuesday, January 20, 2004, at 11:14AM, Matt Robertson wrote:
Previously, if you tried to send cfmail to foo@ bar.com (note the
space) or foo@@bar.com or somesuch, cfmail would just dump it into
the
undeliverable folder and soldier on.
Just to verify what I think everyone has already
PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CFMX 'bug'?Easy to crash CFMAIL.
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:05:37 +
On Tuesday 20 Jan 2004 16:57 pm, Adam Reynolds wrote:
Thomas,
Technically it is a bug. Cfmail should not throw an exception when
passed
an email
I would make sure you are using CFMX 6.1.
If this is still a problem, I would work a reproducible test case through technical support - you will not be charged if it is a bug in CFMX.
--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia Server Development
-Original Message-
From: Bosky, Dave [mailto:[EMAIL
Now, if you call the page, the domaincookie does not get set.
This works fine as far a i know for a single site on IIS.
Now.. you are enabling Session State and Client State in your code.. Are you using
J2EE sessions? or is it enabled?
If you are using both session and client states, you might
Have you changed the cacheRealPath setting per the Release Notes? (If
you apply the Updaters, check it again - one of the Updaters changes
the value back!)
On Monday, Feb 17, 2003, at 05:58 US/Pacific, Stefan Salzbrunn wrote:
OK, we think this is a bug, but we would ike to verify:
On
Peter,
I would like to look into this issue for you.
What was your upgrade path?
michael d corbridge
macromedia
617.219.2307
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Tilbrook, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 2:09 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: CFMX bug?
Installed the developer edition of MX (after Studio MX) and entered the
serial number for the Professional edition I purchased.
Cheers!
-Original Message-
From: Michael Corbridge [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, 3 October 2002 11:11 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFMX bug
Subject: RE: CFMX bug?
Peter,
I would like to look into this issue for you.
What was your upgrade path?
michael d corbridge
macromedia
617.219.2307
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Tilbrook, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 2:09 AM
To: CF-Talk
There is a limit on how long the classpath string can be as you found.
We stopped using the CF Administrator based classpath setting for this
reason. We now use the JRun configuration files instead.
Matt Liotta
President CEO
Montara Software, Inc.
http://www.montarasoftware.com/
V: 415-577-8070
On Tuesday, August 20, 2002, at 12:34 PM, Matt Liotta wrote:
There is a limit on how long the classpath string can be as you found.
We stopped using the CF Administrator based classpath setting for this
reason. We now use the JRun configuration files instead.
any insight on how to do that?
any insight on how to do that?
The configuration files that are modified by the CF Administrator are just
text files; most contain XML. Just open them up in your text editor of
choice. The file containing the classpath and other JVM information is
CFusionMX/runtime/bin/jvm.config.
Dave Watts,
CFMX automatically converts variables with dots into structures. I
wonder if cfdumping request.rootpath or request.Mirrordir might be
interesting.
-Original Message-
From: James Sleeman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: jeudi 4 juillet 2002 18:35
To: CF-Talk
Subject: CFMX bug ??
- Original Message -
From: James Sleeman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 6:34 PM
Subject: CFMX bug ??
CFLOOP LIST=#ValueList(Q_Changers.Name)# INDEX=file
CFFILE ACTION=COPY SOURCE=#REQUEST.RootPath##file#
: Re: CFMX bug ??
- Original Message -
From: James Sleeman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 6:34 PM
Subject: CFMX bug ??
CFLOOP LIST=#ValueList(Q_Changers.Name)# INDEX=file
CFFILE ACTION=COPY SOURCE=#REQUEST.RootPath##file
Hmm... Does that say that File is a keyword and you cant use it as
a variable in CFMX Java Architecture... Most likely so.
Joe
-Original Message-
From: James Sleeman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 2:59 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFMX bug ??
- Original
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 7:04 PM
Subject: RE: CFMX bug ??
In the second case, #URL# might be the prime suspect for the same
reason.
Yes, duh, realised that as soon as I posted :-) Don't
I heard that on CFMX the loop over a list is deprecated..
Please say it ain't so!
Seriously ... if this is so my only question is why
-Original Message-
From: Gianluca Pinelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, 4 July 2002 4:36 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFMX bug ??
I
Complex object types cannot be converted to simple values.
The Error Occurred in J:\InnovativeMedia\StaffAdmin\qry_husk.cfm:
line
71
Called from J:\InnovativeMedia\StaffAdmin\dsp_husk.cfm: line 6
Called from J:\InnovativeMedia\StaffAdmin\index.cfm: line 126
69 : CFOUTPUT
04, 2002 9:13 AM
Subject: RE: CFMX bug ??
I heard that on CFMX the loop over a list is deprecated..
Please say it ain't so!
Seriously ... if this is so my only question is why
-Original Message-
From: Gianluca Pinelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, 4 July 2002 4
As far as I can tell file doesn't work, but cffile does.
Cheers
From: James Sleeman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CFMX bug ??
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 19:15:39 +1200
Complex object types cannot be converted to simple values
---
Currently in ColdFusion MX, you can create a variable with the same name
as
a scope (Application, CGI, Client, Cookie, Form, Request, Server, Session,
URL, or Variables). The created variable is only visible if the Variables
scope prefix is explicitly used; otherwise, an error
Actually, Ray Camden told us at CFUN02 that that is a typo and you can
still loop over a struct.
Sandy Clark
-Original Message-
From: Gianluca Pinelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 3:20 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFMX bug ??
From the CFML Changes
70 matches
Mail list logo
