some INN bugs from RH bugzilla
Russ Allbery
rra at stanford.edu
Fri Dec 9 18:28:07 UTC 2005
Jeffrey M Vinocur <jeff at litech.org> writes:
> On Dec 2, 2005, at 6:46 AM, Martin Stransky wrote:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174672
> This is a complaint that an application that links against libinn and
> calls server_init() will have TMPDIR set. The actual scenario in
> which this occurs is not provided, so I'm not sure it's a bug. But
> we can discuss it...
I plan on dropping all of the clientlib compatibility functions in the
next major release of INN. INN really doesn't do a good enough job of
providing an NNTP library to warrant continuing to include them, and very
few programs use them. (INN will eventually provide a different NNTP
library with a much different API, but that's another story.)
Please let me know if that would cause problems for you, but I doubt it
will.
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53948
> This is a complaint that INN should not complain about duplicate Cc:
> headers.
> As far as I know we're on shaky ground here with regard to having a
> specification to follow, but to my eye, we follow the latest USEFOR
> draft back to RFC 2822. And RFC 2822 states quite clearly in section
> 3.6 that the maximum number of Cc headers is 1. Therefore I don't
> believe this is a bug, unless someone else feels otherwise?
It's a legitimate bug that INN cares about Cc headers at all, since
they're not actually Usenet headers and have no Usenet meaning. That INN
cares is purely a side effect of how Perl spam filtering hooks are
currently implemented, and when they're rewritten, this will no longer be
a problem. However, that's something of a long-term project.
--
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
More information about the inn-bugs
mailing list