| msg32081 - (view) |
Author: Sye van der Veen (syeberman) * |
Date: 2007-05-19 16:06 |
| When email.FeedParser.BufferedSubFile sees "\r" at the end of the pushed-in data, it assumes that it is a Macintosh-style line terminator. Instead, it should request more data, to ensure that the next character is not "\n", which would make it a Windows-style line terminator. This affects email.message_from_file, which reads in the data in 8192 byte chunks. The following code demonstrates this: ==================================== from StringIO import StringIO from email.FeedParser import \ BufferedSubFile, NeedMoreData fp = StringIO( "1\r\n10\r\n100\r\n" "1000\r\n10000\r\n" ) bsf = BufferedSubFile( ) while True: data = fp.read( 3 ) if not data: break bsf.push( data ) for line in bsf: if line is NeedMoreData: break print repr( line ) bsf.close() ==================================== The output is: ==================================== '1\r\n' '10\r' '\n' '100\r\n' '1000\r\n' '10000\r' '\n' ==================================== |
|
|
| msg32082 - (view) |
Author: Sye van der Veen (syeberman) * |
Date: 2007-05-19 16:09 |
| File Added: BufferedSubFileBug.py |
|
|
| msg84718 - (view) |
Author: Daniel Diniz (ajaksu2) *  |
Date: 2009-03-30 23:38 |
| Confirmed on trunk. |
|
|
| msg90957 - (view) |
Author: Neil Tallim (Red HamsterX) |
Date: 2009-07-26 20:29 |
| Attached a patch containing a unit test based on Sye van der Veen's example and a solution for this problem. Written against Python 2.6 (trunk), r74214, which was current at the time of submission. This is my first patch, so please let me know if I did something wrong or overstepped bounds by not noticing that this was assigned until after writing this fix. |
|
|
| msg90988 - (view) |
Author: Neil Tallim (Red HamsterX) |
Date: 2009-07-27 17:50 |
| Confirmed in trunk and all current branches (r74225: 2.6, 2.7, 3.1, 3.2). Patches for all four active versions will be added momentarily. Note: my submission yesterday was mistagged, claiming to be for trunk while it was really for 2.6, which is what this bug was actively marked with at the time. |
|
|
| msg90990 - (view) |
Author: Neil Tallim (Red HamsterX) |
Date: 2009-07-27 17:56 |
| Attached a patch containing a unit test based on Sye van der Veen's example and a solution for issue 1721862. Written against Python 2.6, r74225. |
|
|
| msg90991 - (view) |
Author: Neil Tallim (Red HamsterX) |
Date: 2009-07-27 17:57 |
| Attached a patch containing a unit test based on Sye van der Veen's example and a solution for issue 1721862. Written against Python 2.7, r74225. |
|
|
| msg90992 - (view) |
Author: Neil Tallim (Red HamsterX) |
Date: 2009-07-27 17:58 |
| Attached a patch containing a unit test based on Sye van der Veen's example and a solution for issue 1721862. Written against Python 3.1, r74225. |
|
|
| msg90993 - (view) |
Author: Neil Tallim (Red HamsterX) |
Date: 2009-07-27 17:59 |
| Attached a patch containing a unit test based on Sye van der Veen's example and a solution for issue 1721862. Written against Python 3.2, r74225. |
|
|
| msg97665 - (view) |
Author: R. David Murray (r.david.murray) *  |
Date: 2010-01-12 22:12 |
| This seems to be a duplicate of issue 1555570, which has a simpler patch. |
|
|