On 28 Apr 2015, at 15:53, Dianne Skoll wrote:
Hi,
Actually, this is a more thought-through patch. I don't use Postfix,
but
if any Postfix users would care to give this a try, I'd appreciate it.
Built and installed 2.78 plus that patch, ~4 hours ago on my personal
system, works as intended without any sign of trouble on 219 messages,
all single-rcpt.
Doing the build reminded me of a longstanding unreported bug in
t/unit/dates.t, in the rfc2822_date_works test. It assumes that it is
using the GNU/Linux implementation of 'date' or another which includes
'unrecognized' in the error message when it is given a bad option. BSD
'date' accepts no 'long' options and says "date: illegal option -- -" so
it breaks this. A quick and dirty hack is to add '|illegal' to the
pattern match in the existing test, but frankly the whole model of
looking for specific words in a merged stdout+stderr is a bit shabby.
Here's an alternative, using a highly portable 'date' command and
determining its success based simply on the return value:
--- t/unit/dates.t.orig 2015-04-29 00:05:30.000000000 -0400
+++ t/unit/dates.t 2015-04-29 00:02:30.000000000 -0400
@@ -23,8 +23,9 @@
sub rfc2822_date_works : Test(1)
{
- my $want = `date --rfc-822 2>&1`;
- return '"date" command does not support --rfc-822 option' if $want =~
/unrecognized/;
+ my $want = `LC_ALL=C date +"%a, %d %b %Y %H:%M:%S %z"`;
+ my $RC=$?;
+ return '"date" command returned $RC' if $RC != 0;
chomp $want;
$want =~ s/\d{2}:\d{2} (-+)/\\d{2}:\\d{2} $1/;
like(::main::rfc2822_date(), qr/$want/, 'Got correct RFC 2822 date');
_______________________________________________
NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above
message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it.
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com
MIMEDefang mailing list MIMEDefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
