From pf at pfortin.com Wed Jun 1 00:12:05 2016 From: pf at pfortin.com (Pierre Fortin) Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 18:12:05 -0400 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... Message-ID: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> Thought this might be useful info about date sorting... Last week, I received some mail which didn't appear where it should in the list of messages. Discovered the problem to be due to the sender using an antiquated date format. Sent them the following and still haven't heard back... >It should read: > Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 22:23:29 -0400 >not: Date: Wed May 25 22:23:29 EDT 2016 > >Your Date causes incorrect sort-by-date at the receiving end. >See also https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-4.3 The sender...? US-CERT! The guys who keep tabs on vulnerabilities... sure inspires confidence... :/ From rol at witbe.net Wed Jun 1 01:09:24 2016 From: rol at witbe.net (Paul Rolland (=?UTF-8?B?44Od44O844Or44O744Ot44Op44Oz?=)) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 01:09:24 +0200 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> Message-ID: <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> Hello Pierre, On Tue, 31 May 2016 18:12:05 -0400 Pierre Fortin wrote: > Thought this might be useful info about date sorting... > > Last week, I received some mail which didn't appear where it should in > the list of messages. Discovered the problem to be due to the sender > using an antiquated date format. Sent them the following and still > haven't heard back... > > >It should read: > > Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 22:23:29 -0400 > >not: Date: Wed May 25 22:23:29 EDT 2016 > > > >Your Date causes incorrect sort-by-date at the receiving end. > >See also https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-4.3 I'm also "fighting" with GrandStream, a IPBX maker, because the latest update changes the date to be formatted as: Date: Tue May 31 03:10:08 CEST 2016 I opened a ticket, referred them to the RFC, and was told that this was escalated.... Ticket was closed yesterday due to lack of activity, never got a reply from the escalation. Guess we are going to have to learn to work with these buggy dates :( Paul -- Paul Rolland E-Mail : rol(at)witbe.net CTO - Witbe.net SA Tel. +33 (0)1 47 67 77 77 Les Collines de l'Arche Fax. +33 (0)1 47 67 77 99 F-92057 Paris La Defense RIPE : PR12-RIPE LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/paulrolland Skype : rollandpaul "I worry about my child and the Internet all the time, even though she's too young to have logged on yet. Here's what I worry about. I worry that 10 or 15 years from now, she will come to me and say 'Daddy, where were you when they took freedom of the press away from the Internet?'" --Mike Godwin, Electronic Frontier Foundation -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 181 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From pf at pfortin.com Wed Jun 1 01:26:24 2016 From: pf at pfortin.com (Pierre Fortin) Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 19:26:24 -0400 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> Message-ID: <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 01:09:24 +0200 Paul Rolland (ポール・ロラン) wrote: >Hello Pierre, > >On Tue, 31 May 2016 18:12:05 -0400 >Pierre Fortin wrote: > >> Thought this might be useful info about date sorting... >> >> Last week, I received some mail which didn't appear where it should in >> the list of messages. Discovered the problem to be due to the sender >> using an antiquated date format. Sent them the following and still >> haven't heard back... >> >> >It should read: >> > Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 22:23:29 -0400 >> >not: Date: Wed May 25 22:23:29 EDT 2016 >> > >> >Your Date causes incorrect sort-by-date at the receiving end. >> >See also https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-4.3 > >I'm also "fighting" with GrandStream, a IPBX maker, because the latest >update changes the date to be formatted as: > >Date: Tue May 31 03:10:08 CEST 2016 > >I opened a ticket, referred them to the RFC, and was told that this was >escalated.... Ticket was closed yesterday due to lack of activity, never >got a reply from the escalation. > >Guess we are going to have to learn to work with these buggy dates :( Yup... looked into the code and thought the best place to "fix" this was as the message(s) arrived... I'm willing to give it a shot if someone can point me to the right bit of code (inc.c?) where the message arrives and just before it gets written, I can give it a try... >Paul From andrej at kacian.sk Wed Jun 1 07:42:49 2016 From: andrej at kacian.sk (Andrej Kacian) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 07:42:49 +0200 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> Message-ID: <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> On Tue, 31 May 2016 19:26:24 -0400 Pierre Fortin wrote: > Yup... looked into the code and thought the best place to "fix" this > was as the message(s) arrived... I'm willing to give it a shot if someone > can point me to the right bit of code (inc.c?) where the message arrives > and just before it gets written, I can give it a try... We generally have a policy of not modifying contents of received messages, so instead of fixing the date, I think it would be better to just parse the obsolete date string correctly. Look in procheader.c, function procheader_scan_date_string(). Regards, -- Andrej From h.m.brand at xs4all.nl Wed Jun 1 08:01:42 2016 From: h.m.brand at xs4all.nl (H.Merijn Brand) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 08:01:42 +0200 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> Message-ID: <20160601080142.29c8fda9@pc09.procura.nl> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 07:42:49 +0200, Andrej Kacian wrote: > On Tue, 31 May 2016 19:26:24 -0400 > Pierre Fortin wrote: > > > Yup... looked into the code and thought the best place to "fix" this > > was as the message(s) arrived... I'm willing to give it a shot if someone > > can point me to the right bit of code (inc.c?) where the message arrives > > and just before it gets written, I can give it a try... > > We generally have a policy of not modifying contents of received > messages, so instead of fixing the date, I think it would be better to > just parse the obsolete date string correctly. Look in procheader.c, > function procheader_scan_date_string(). > > Regards, I always add code there too, because I cannot stand AM/PM @@ -820,6 +820,18 @@ static gint procheader_scan_date_string(const gchar *str, day, month, year, hh, mm, ss); if (result == 6) return 0; + result = sscanf(str, "%3s %3s %d %2d:%2d:%2d %d", + weekday, month, day, hh, mm, ss, year); + if (result == 7) return 0; + + result = sscanf(str, "%3s, %d %3s %d %2d:%2d:%2d %2s", + weekday, day, month, year, hh, mm, ss, zone); + if (result == 7) { + if (*zone == 'P') hh = hh + 12; + *zone = (gchar)0; + return 0; + } + *ss = 0; result = sscanf(str, "%10s %d %9s %d %2d:%2d %6s", weekday, day, month, year, hh, mm, zone); -- H.Merijn Brand http://tux.nl Perl Monger http://amsterdam.pm.org/ using perl5.00307 .. 5.23 porting perl5 on HP-UX, AIX, and openSUSE http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/ http://www.test-smoke.org/ http://qa.perl.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 490 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From subscript at free.fr Wed Jun 1 08:46:11 2016 From: subscript at free.fr (wwp) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 08:46:11 +0200 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160601080142.29c8fda9@pc09.procura.nl> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> <20160601080142.29c8fda9@pc09.procura.nl> Message-ID: <20160601084611.07d6c861@anthra> Hello H.Merijn, On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 08:01:42 +0200 "H.Merijn Brand" wrote: > On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 07:42:49 +0200, Andrej Kacian > wrote: > > > On Tue, 31 May 2016 19:26:24 -0400 > > Pierre Fortin wrote: > > > > > Yup... looked into the code and thought the best place to "fix" this > > > was as the message(s) arrived... I'm willing to give it a shot if someone > > > can point me to the right bit of code (inc.c?) where the message arrives > > > and just before it gets written, I can give it a try... > > > > We generally have a policy of not modifying contents of received > > messages, so instead of fixing the date, I think it would be better to > > just parse the obsolete date string correctly. Look in procheader.c, > > function procheader_scan_date_string(). > > > > Regards, > > I always add code there too, because I cannot stand AM/PM > > @@ -820,6 +820,18 @@ static gint procheader_scan_date_string(const gchar *str, > day, month, year, hh, mm, ss); > if (result == 6) return 0; > > + result = sscanf(str, "%3s %3s %d %2d:%2d:%2d %d", > + weekday, month, day, hh, mm, ss, year); > + if (result == 7) return 0; > + > + result = sscanf(str, "%3s, %d %3s %d %2d:%2d:%2d %2s", > + weekday, day, month, year, hh, mm, ss, zone); > + if (result == 7) { > + if (*zone == 'P') hh = hh + 12; > + *zone = (gchar)0; > + return 0; > + } > + > *ss = 0; > result = sscanf(str, "%10s %d %9s %d %2d:%2d %6s", > weekday, day, month, year, hh, mm, zone); Where in the GUI/data do you have to act from the code in order to customize date/time display that you cannot do from the preferences? Could you please elaborate a bit? Regards, -- wwp -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From pf at pfortin.com Wed Jun 1 08:57:47 2016 From: pf at pfortin.com (Pierre Fortin) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 02:57:47 -0400 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> Message-ID: <20160601025747.1be2c0ab@pfortin.com> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 07:42:49 +0200 Andrej Kacian wrote: >On Tue, 31 May 2016 19:26:24 -0400 >Pierre Fortin wrote: > >> Yup... looked into the code and thought the best place to "fix" this >> was as the message(s) arrived... I'm willing to give it a shot if >> someone can point me to the right bit of code (inc.c?) where the >> message arrives and just before it gets written, I can give it a >> try... > >We generally have a policy of not modifying contents of received >messages, so instead of fixing the date, I think it would be better to >just parse the obsolete date string correctly. Look in procheader.c, >function procheader_scan_date_string(). Ah-ha! (burst of enlightenment :) So just the parsing is needed... ================ leaving for the benefit of other readers =========== The RFCs also talk about obsolete date formats. In particular, the US timezones and even list a translation: UT, GMT = +0000 EDT -0400 EST -0500 CDT -0500 CST -0600 MDT -0600 MST -0700 PDT -0700 PST -0800 and also mentions military TZ references (though I've never seen these): a,A = -1 through i,I = -9 j,J not used (appears to be northern Pacific) k,K = -10 through y,Y +12 z,Z +0000 ================ leaving for the benefit of other readers =========== Paul Holland sent me a private note with CEST (Central European Summer Time) which doesn't appear to be RFC referenced... Notwithstanding the above, Paul H. provided this code: // Date: Tue May 31 03:10:08 CEST 2016 result = sscanf(str, "%3s %3s %d %d:%d:%d %s %d", weekday, month, day, hh, mm, ss, zone, year); if (result == 8) return 0; which handles the case I originally posted about: // Date: Wed May 25 22:23:29 EDT 2016 Cool! More digging revealed that, except for this date format, CM already handles pretty much all of the above at remote_tzoffset_sec() in src/common/utils.c Continually amazed by this great MUA :) >Regards, From h.m.brand at xs4all.nl Wed Jun 1 08:57:56 2016 From: h.m.brand at xs4all.nl (H.Merijn Brand) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 08:57:56 +0200 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160601084611.07d6c861@anthra> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> <20160601080142.29c8fda9@pc09.procura.nl> <20160601084611.07d6c861@anthra> Message-ID: <20160601085756.015e7b65@pc09.procura.nl> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 08:46:11 +0200, wwp wrote: > Where in the GUI/data do you have to act from the code in order to > customize date/time display that you cannot do from the preferences? > Could you please elaborate a bit? These patches gathered from waaaaay back: diff -pur a/src/procheader.c b/src/procheader.c --- a/src/procheader.c 2008-04-19 06:00:30.000000000 +0200 +++ b/src/procheader.c 2008-08-06 14:27:54.000000000 +0200 It /might/ be that the options for date-display customization have been added afterward. As long as these do not disturb normal operation, I just leave them in. It cannot harm, can it? -- H.Merijn Brand http://tux.nl Perl Monger http://amsterdam.pm.org/ using perl5.00307 .. 5.23 porting perl5 on HP-UX, AIX, and openSUSE http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/ http://www.test-smoke.org/ http://qa.perl.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 490 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From subscript at free.fr Wed Jun 1 09:33:40 2016 From: subscript at free.fr (wwp) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 09:33:40 +0200 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160601085756.015e7b65@pc09.procura.nl> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> <20160601080142.29c8fda9@pc09.procura.nl> <20160601084611.07d6c861@anthra> <20160601085756.015e7b65@pc09.procura.nl> Message-ID: <20160601093340.4556ffe2@anthra> Hello H.Merijn, On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 08:57:56 +0200 "H.Merijn Brand" wrote: > On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 08:46:11 +0200, wwp wrote: > > > Where in the GUI/data do you have to act from the code in order to > > customize date/time display that you cannot do from the preferences? > > Could you please elaborate a bit? > > These patches gathered from waaaaay back: > > diff -pur a/src/procheader.c b/src/procheader.c > --- a/src/procheader.c 2008-04-19 06:00:30.000000000 +0200 > +++ b/src/procheader.c 2008-08-06 14:27:54.000000000 +0200 > > It /might/ be that the options for date-display customization have been > added afterward. As long as these do not disturb normal operation, I > just leave them in. It cannot harm, can it? I applied locally only, it cannot :-). Regards, -- wwp -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From jseymour at LinxNet.com Wed Jun 1 12:40:28 2016 From: jseymour at LinxNet.com (Jim Seymour) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 06:40:28 -0400 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> Message-ID: <20160601064028.2a5a075d@win0091> On Tue, 31 May 2016 18:12:05 -0400 Pierre Fortin wrote: > Thought this might be useful info about date sorting... > > Last week, I received some mail which didn't appear where it should in > the list of messages. Discovered the problem to be due to the sender > using an antiquated date format. Sent them the following and still > haven't heard back... > > >It should read: > > Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 22:23:29 -0400 > >not: Date: Wed May 25 22:23:29 EDT 2016 > > > >Your Date causes incorrect sort-by-date at the receiving end. > >See also https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-4.3 > > The sender...? US-CERT! The guys who keep tabs on > vulnerabilities... sure inspires confidence... :/ Odd. I just looked at my CERT folder: | Subject: TA16-144A: WPAD Name Collision Vulnerability | Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 15:22:06 -0500 | To: jseymour at linxnet.com | From: "US-CERT" Looks right to me. Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at . From pf at pfortin.com Wed Jun 1 15:19:38 2016 From: pf at pfortin.com (Pierre Fortin) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 09:19:38 -0400 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160601064028.2a5a075d@win0091> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601064028.2a5a075d@win0091> Message-ID: <20160601091938.7fabe0d3@pfortin.com> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 06:40:28 -0400 Jim Seymour wrote: >Odd. I just looked at my CERT folder: > >| Subject: TA16-144A: WPAD Name Collision Vulnerability >| Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 15:22:06 -0500 >| To: jseymour at linxnet.com >| From: "US-CERT" > >Looks right to me. Then you never submitted a report... :) The weekly reports are correct; the bad date was in a message to all past reporters... Subject: NTIA Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure Survey [INFO#558540] From rol at witbe.net Wed Jun 1 17:05:31 2016 From: rol at witbe.net (Paul Rolland (=?UTF-8?B?44Od44O844Or44O744Ot44Op44Oz?=)) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 17:05:31 +0200 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160601080142.29c8fda9@pc09.procura.nl> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> <20160601080142.29c8fda9@pc09.procura.nl> Message-ID: <20160601170531.04dd08ee@riri.DEF.witbe.net> Hello, On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 08:01:42 +0200 "H.Merijn Brand" wrote: > I always add code there too, because I cannot stand AM/PM ;) So, here is attached a first patch combining what H.Merijn is using, and what I sent yesterday to Pierre. While we are on that area, any other idea/requests ? Does any feel we should handle more formats ? Best, Paul -- Paul Rolland E-Mail : rol(at)witbe.net CTO - Witbe.net SA Tel. +33 (0)1 47 67 77 77 Les Collines de l'Arche Fax. +33 (0)1 47 67 77 99 F-92057 Paris La Defense RIPE : PR12-RIPE LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/paulrolland Skype : rollandpaul "I worry about my child and the Internet all the time, even though she's too young to have logged on yet. Here's what I worry about. I worry that 10 or 15 years from now, she will come to me and say 'Daddy, where were you when they took freedom of the press away from the Internet?'" --Mike Godwin, Electronic Frontier Foundation -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 973 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 181 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From nicolas.claws at iselin.ch Thu Jun 2 08:10:42 2016 From: nicolas.claws at iselin.ch (Nicolas Iselin) Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 08:10:42 +0200 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160601170531.04dd08ee@riri.DEF.witbe.net> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> <20160601080142.29c8fda9@pc09.procura.nl> <20160601170531.04dd08ee@riri.DEF.witbe.net> Message-ID: <20160602081042.2a2f38e1@omega64> Hi Paul Am Wed, 1 Jun 2016 17:05:31 +0200 schrieb "Paul Rolland (ポール・ロラン)" : > While we are on that area, any other idea/requests ? Does any feel we > should handle more formats ? I'm sorry I didn't follow the whole thread, so this request might be covered already. I receive mails from an asterisk based IP telephony software (Askozia) with badly formed date headers. So sometimes I miss a mail because these mails are considered to be older than everything else. Examples are: date: Fri May 27 14:27:56 CEST 2016 date: Tue Apr 26 09:49:45 CEST 2016 date: Thu Feb 4 10:00:23 CET 2016 date: Thu Jan 28 08:51:38 CET 2016 I guess this is not as defined in the RFCs, but it would be nice if claws would be more "liberal" in this case :-) Regards Nicolas From claws at thewildbeast.co.uk Thu Jun 2 08:28:52 2016 From: claws at thewildbeast.co.uk (Paul) Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 07:28:52 +0100 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160602081042.2a2f38e1@omega64> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> <20160601080142.29c8fda9@pc09.procura.nl> <20160601170531.04dd08ee@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160602081042.2a2f38e1@omega64> Message-ID: <20160602072852.4304a741@kujata> http://www.claws-mail.org/tools.php At this URL, and also in the tools/ directory of the release tarballs, and in git, you can find a script to use with Actions: -------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<-------- * fix-date.sh WHAT IT DOES Add a 'Date:' header to the selected email(s) when such header is missing. The correct date is guessed from other headers that contain timestamp information (preferred: Fetchinfo header if found) or from the file or system date as a fallback. The order or preference for the date valuereplacement can be changed by editing the script. This script can be used to fix messages that show non RFC-compliant Date headers as well. X-Original-Date is always added too if not already existing (if so, it's left untouched), to keep track of the original value if any. An existing Date: header is not overwritten unless you use the --force switch. Non RFC-compliant dates can be overwritten using the --rfc switch. Use --strict to use strict RFC matching patterns for date values in other headers. HOW TO USE IT fix_date.sh %F ------->8-------->8-------->8-------->8-------- From brenda at ibas.co.uk Thu Jun 2 12:33:59 2016 From: brenda at ibas.co.uk (brenda at ibas.co.uk) Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 11:33:59 +0100 Subject: [Users] (no subject) Message-ID: <20160602113359.00003520@ibas.co.uk> Begin forwarded message: Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 10:59:06 +0100 From: To: users at lists.claws-mail.org Hi, I have installed Claws as it supprts Pop3, like the design and layout and have sorted most initial issues with one exception: I have four accounts and each time a mail is received to any one of them it is duplicated to all other accounts. More worrying is that I am also receiving copies of mails sent to my work colleagues who are on different e.mail systems. So I am getting multiple repeat mails intended for various people in our office - even those not intended for me. Is there a way rojund this ? Many thanks, Brenda From claws at thewildbeast.co.uk Thu Jun 2 13:39:26 2016 From: claws at thewildbeast.co.uk (Paul) Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 12:39:26 +0100 Subject: [Users] (no subject) In-Reply-To: <20160602113359.00003520@ibas.co.uk> References: <20160602113359.00003520@ibas.co.uk> Message-ID: <20160602123926.5ec338ea@kujata> On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 11:33:59 +0100 wrote: > I have four accounts and each time a mail is received to any one of > them it is duplicated to all other accounts. You are not clear here. In Claws Mail a POP account is an entity which is distinct from an Mailbox. All of the your 4 POP accounts could share a single mailbox (this is the default), or you could have set it up so that they each have their own mailbox. This could be caused by your filtering rules. Do you have filtering rules? Tell us more. > More worrying is that > I am also receiving copies of mails sent to my work colleagues who > are on different e.mail systems. So I am getting multiple repeat > mails intended for various people in our office - even those not > intended for me. There is no way that Claws Mail could make this happen. The mails you are receiving are the mails which the server gives to you. with regards Paul From rol at witbe.net Thu Jun 2 16:38:58 2016 From: rol at witbe.net (Paul Rolland (=?UTF-8?B?44Od44O844Or44O744Ot44Op44Oz?=)) Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 16:38:58 +0200 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160602072852.4304a741@kujata> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> <20160601080142.29c8fda9@pc09.procura.nl> <20160601170531.04dd08ee@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160602081042.2a2f38e1@omega64> <20160602072852.4304a741@kujata> Message-ID: <20160602163858.2c6c7865@riri.DEF.witbe.net> Hello Paul, On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 07:28:52 +0100 Paul wrote: > At this URL, and also in the tools/ directory of the release > tarballs, and in git, you can find a script to use with Actions: > > * fix-date.sh > > WHAT IT DOES > Add a 'Date:' header to the selected email(s) when such That's nice, but I don't see why I should have to go through an action on the mails manually when that can be done automatically by Claws. And the second problem I see is that I have Processing rules which are acting on the date of the email, and dispatching them to Archives folder. These mails with their "unknown" date are automatically processed and dispatched to these Archives. Using a manual Actions would force me to go through all the possible destination folder, apply the Action, and then move the mails back to the correct location... What's the problem with extending Claws ability to recognize new date formats ? Regards, Paul -- Paul Rolland E-Mail : rol(at)witbe.net CTO - Witbe.net SA Tel. +33 (0)1 47 67 77 77 Les Collines de l'Arche Fax. +33 (0)1 47 67 77 99 F-92057 Paris La Defense RIPE : PR12-RIPE LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/paulrolland Skype : rollandpaul "I worry about my child and the Internet all the time, even though she's too young to have logged on yet. Here's what I worry about. I worry that 10 or 15 years from now, she will come to me and say 'Daddy, where were you when they took freedom of the press away from the Internet?'" --Mike Godwin, Electronic Frontier Foundation -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 181 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From claws at thewildbeast.co.uk Thu Jun 2 16:43:06 2016 From: claws at thewildbeast.co.uk (Paul) Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 15:43:06 +0100 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160602163858.2c6c7865@riri.DEF.witbe.net> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> <20160601080142.29c8fda9@pc09.procura.nl> <20160601170531.04dd08ee@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160602081042.2a2f38e1@omega64> <20160602072852.4304a741@kujata> <20160602163858.2c6c7865@riri.DEF.witbe.net> Message-ID: <20160602154306.788c347b@kujata> On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 16:38:58 +0200 "Paul Rolland (ポール・ロラン)" wrote: > That's nice, but I don't see why I should have to go through an > action on the mails manually when that can be done automatically by > Claws. I'm not saying you should, I'm saying you could. > What's the problem with extending Claws ability to recognize new > date formats ? None come to mind right now. with regards Paul From rol at witbe.net Thu Jun 2 17:38:14 2016 From: rol at witbe.net (Paul Rolland (=?UTF-8?B?44Od44O844Or44O744Ot44Op44Oz?=)) Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 17:38:14 +0200 Subject: [Users] FYI: Bad date formats and sorting... In-Reply-To: <20160602154306.788c347b@kujata> References: <20160531181205.426893df@pfortin.com> <20160601010924.24143277@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160531192624.31fa62af@pfortin.com> <20160601074249.4f2c4582@penny> <20160601080142.29c8fda9@pc09.procura.nl> <20160601170531.04dd08ee@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160602081042.2a2f38e1@omega64> <20160602072852.4304a741@kujata> <20160602163858.2c6c7865@riri.DEF.witbe.net> <20160602154306.788c347b@kujata> Message-ID: <20160602173814.00ddecff@riri.DEF.witbe.net> Hello, On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 15:43:06 +0100 Paul wrote: > On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 16:38:58 +0200 > "Paul Rolland (ポール・ロラン)" wrote: > > > That's nice, but I don't see why I should have to go through an > > action on the mails manually when that can be done automatically by > > Claws. > > I'm not saying you should, I'm saying you could. Sorry, I misunderstood you, thanks for the clarification. Best, Paul -- Paul Rolland E-Mail : rol(at)witbe.net CTO - Witbe.net SA Tel. +33 (0)1 47 67 77 77 Les Collines de l'Arche Fax. +33 (0)1 47 67 77 99 F-92057 Paris La Defense RIPE : PR12-RIPE LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/paulrolland Skype : rollandpaul "I worry about my child and the Internet all the time, even though she's too young to have logged on yet. Here's what I worry about. I worry that 10 or 15 years from now, she will come to me and say 'Daddy, where were you when they took freedom of the press away from the Internet?'" --Mike Godwin, Electronic Frontier Foundation -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 181 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From codejodler at gmx.ch Fri Jun 3 07:10:42 2016 From: codejodler at gmx.ch (Michael) Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 07:10:42 +0200 Subject: [Users] Ghost emails / very strange POP behavior In-Reply-To: <1464721569.911.7.camel@zoho.com> References: <20160530233318.495939e2.codejodler@gmx.ch> <20160531094318.34dc4f46@utnubu> <20160531141828.2f5ea9e3.codejodler@gmx.ch> <20160531142209.4660cd08.codejodler@gmx.ch> <20160531092917.34cea11a@pfortin.com> <20160531202452.12011e3e.codejodler@gmx.ch> <20160531145222.2b39bde0@pfortin.com> <1464721569.911.7.camel@zoho.com> Message-ID: <20160603071042.229ebf50.codejodler@gmx.ch> Since i added a time delay of 3 days now to my "remove from server" setting in the PC claws, the last three days are naturally downloaded a second time when i launch laptop claws. Somehow i wonder if something like this could have triggered the strange behavior. However, that time, i had no time delay checked, in neither device, and it wouldn't explain why i didn't see the time-shifted mails in the webmailer. MSP didn't respond so far. Maybe they're working on it now ;P From claws at thewildbeast.co.uk Fri Jun 3 09:36:28 2016 From: claws at thewildbeast.co.uk (Paul) Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 08:36:28 +0100 Subject: [Users] Ghost emails / very strange POP behavior In-Reply-To: <20160603071042.229ebf50.codejodler@gmx.ch> References: <20160530233318.495939e2.codejodler@gmx.ch> <20160531094318.34dc4f46@utnubu> <20160531141828.2f5ea9e3.codejodler@gmx.ch> <20160531142209.4660cd08.codejodler@gmx.ch> <20160531092917.34cea11a@pfortin.com> <20160531202452.12011e3e.codejodler@gmx.ch> <20160531145222.2b39bde0@pfortin.com> <1464721569.911.7.camel@zoho.com> <20160603071042.229ebf50.codejodler@gmx.ch> Message-ID: <20160603083628.7028110c@kujata> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 07:10:42 +0200 Michael wrote: > Somehow i wonder if something like this could have triggered the > strange behavior. There is no reason to think that it would. with regards Paul From noreply at thewildbeast.co.uk Fri Jun 3 16:06:25 2016 From: noreply at thewildbeast.co.uk (noreply at thewildbeast.co.uk) Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2016 14:06:25 +0000 Subject: [Users] [Bug 3638] GData Plugin fails after initial Google handshake In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3638 --- Comment #7 from lbickley --- As you can see, the bug still exists. Is anyone working on this problem? I am currently running: Claws version 3.13.2-120-ge630ef System Information GTK+ 2.24.28 / GLib 2.42.2 Locale: en_US.UTF-8 (charset: UTF-8) Operating System: Linux 3.16.6-2-desktop (x86_64) ------------------------------------------------- 06:29:12] POP3< +OK Bye-bye. * GData plugin: Starting async contacts query *** GData plugin: Error querying for contacts: Authentication required: Error 401 (Client Error)!!1