Re: [Dbmail-dev] Something's very wrong with one of the patches...

2004-11-19 Thread Sean Chittenden
Since it was I who decided to apply those patches it was my mistake. I know I heeded your warning and added the res_changed=1 in db_get_length. Turns out I did so in cvs-head, but forgot to update the patchset for 2_0. No worries, all sorted out now. I think we're clear for 2.0.1 at this

Re: [Dbmail-dev] Something's very wrong with one of the patches...

2004-11-19 Thread Aaron Stone
Sean Chittenden [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Has the infinite loop IMAP problem been fixed? Last I checked it was still there. -sc I don't think it has, and I'm not sure that anyone has a good handle on what's wrong yet. My feeling is that unless we can fix it this week, we should go ahead with

Re: [Dbmail-dev] cvs commit

2004-11-19 Thread Ilja Booij
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:10:38 +0100, Paul J Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jesse Norell wrote: * lmtp.c (lmtp): fix silly auto_reply bug. You might run grep -ir deliver-to through the source (1.2, 2.0 and 2.1) and fix all those typo's. I just checked dbmail_2_0_branch, and

Re: [Dbmail-dev] Status Reports

2004-11-19 Thread Ilja Booij
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:19:48 -, Aaron Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aaron Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hans Kristian Rosbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Would it be possible for whoever is chief of the dbmail cvs trees to make regular status reports? I like this idea. I nominate

Re: [Dbmail-dev] segfaults fixed in HEAD

2004-11-19 Thread Sean Chittenden
My mistake, born from my lack of experience in using C. I promise I'll stop after this, but if you're reasonably inexperienced in using C, I would highly encourage you to think about using a garbage collection scheme that way your time isn't spent hunting memory errors and is instead spent

Re: [Dbmail-dev] cvs commit

2004-11-19 Thread Jesse Norell
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:10:38 +0100, Paul J Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jesse Norell wrote: * lmtp.c (lmtp): fix silly auto_reply bug. You might run grep -ir deliver-to through the source (1.2, 2.0 and 2.1) and fix all those typo's. I just checked

Re: [Dbmail-dev] cvs commit

2004-11-19 Thread Aaron Stone
Jesse Norell [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:10:38 +0100, Paul J Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jesse Norell wrote: * lmtp.c (lmtp): fix silly auto_reply bug. You might run grep -ir deliver-to through the source (1.2, 2.0 and 2.1) and fix all those

Re: [Dbmail-dev] segfaults fixed in HEAD

2004-11-19 Thread Aaron Stone
Sean Chittenden [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Experience tells me that if you're mixing const char *'s with char *'s in a list, you're going to be in for problems. Ah, and in fact, nearly every use of const char * should really be const char * const which protects both the pointer and what it

Re: [Dbmail-dev] cvs commit

2004-11-19 Thread Jesse Norell
You might run grep -ir deliver-to through the source (1.2, 2.0 and 2.1) and fix all those typo's. I just checked dbmail_2_0_branch, and those are still in there. A possible use of a deliver-to header came up on irc the other day - someone wanted to use a program to call

Re: [Dbmail-dev] cvs commit

2004-11-19 Thread Aaron Stone
Jesse Norell [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: You might run grep -ir deliver-to through the source (1.2, 2.0 and 2.1) and fix all those typo's. I just checked dbmail_2_0_branch, and those are still in there. A possible use of a deliver-to header came up on irc the other day -

[Dbmail-dev] Re: Something's very wrong with one of the patches...

2004-11-19 Thread Bernard Johnson
Aaron Stone wrote: Paul J Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: No worries, all sorted out now. I think we're clear for 2.0.1 at this point. I've found the latest CVS to be very stable (with the exception of this bug) and much faster, especially for searching. Great work! So... Ilja, you around?

Re: [Dbmail-dev] Re: Something's very wrong with one of the patches...

2004-11-19 Thread Aaron Stone
Bernard Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Unless I'm looking in the wrong place, the problem/fix for mysql 4.1.x mysql_real_query return values was not addressed yet (http://mailman.fastxs.net/pipermail/dbmail-dev/2004-October/005212.html). It's easy, unobtrusive, and should be added.