Issue 1464708: fixed handling of nested comments in mail addresses (original) (raw)

Created on 2006-04-05 06:35 by wamcvey, last changed 2022-04-11 14:56 by admin. This issue is now closed.

Messages (6)
msg49967 - (view)	Author: William McVey (wamcvey)	Date: 2006-04-05 06:35
RFC 2822 allows for comments to include other comments in a mail address. email.Utils.getaddresses() handled addresses with a comment, but incorrectly advanced the parsing index twice after a comment finished. This would cause the outer closing paren in an address like: Foo ((FOO Rocks)) <foo@bar.com> to be missed, and treating the rest of the line as part of the outer comment. This patch fixes the bug and adds a testcase to look for the bug.
msg49968 - (view)	Author: William McVey (wamcvey)	Date: 2006-04-05 06:38
Logged In: YES user_id=25956 hmm, didn't seem to attach my patch the first time. Let's try adding it again.
msg49969 - (view)	Author: Neal Norwitz (nnorwitz) *	Date: 2006-04-05 06:46
Logged In: YES user_id=33168 Barry, has the new email addressed this?
msg49970 - (view)	Author: William McVey (wamcvey)	Date: 2006-04-05 19:46
Logged In: YES user_id=25956 I just realized that I only submitted the patch for the email package and that the same bug exists in the rfc822.py package. Even though deprecated, I imagine bug fixes are still appropriate, so I'm attaching a second attachment which patch rfc822.py and adds a testcase for this condition to test/test_rfc822.py. I also noticed that the testcase driver in test_rfc822.py emitted a print statement error but didn't raise a condition when the parsed name or address differed from the expected name. I've adjusted the driver to use assertions so that the error condition are more noticeable (e.g. error status codes).
msg49971 - (view)	Author: William McVey (wamcvey)	Date: 2006-04-05 19:51
Logged In: YES user_id=25956 I see now that there appears to be duplicate patches against the email package attached. I'll go ahead and remove the duplicate, leaving one patch for email package and one patch for rfc822.py. Oh, and it probably goes without saying, but the first patch is relative to the 'email' package directory and the second is relative to the Lib directory in which rfc822.py is located.
msg49972 - (view)	Author: Barry A. Warsaw (barry) *	Date: 2006-04-30 21:27
Logged In: YES user_id=12800 Applied to Python 2.4 for email 3.0 in r45829. This needs to be back ported to Python 2.3 for email 2.5 and forward ported to Python 2.5 for email 4.0.