Paul Vojta <[email protected]> ha escrit:
> However, on further thought, it seems that all occurrences of sp in that
> long if statement should really be sp1 -- otherwise they refer to text
> after the ']', which doesn't make sense (keep in mind that my knowledge
> of the IMAP protocol is next to nil).
No, the rest of the occurences are right. They are intended to point
past the closing bracket, where, according to the protocol, a
human-readable description of the problem is printed. For example, the ALERT
response code is defined by RFC 2060 as:
ALERT The human-readable text contains a special alert
that MUST be presented to the user in a
fashion hat calls the user's attention to the message.
Here's an example of a server returning that code:
* OK [ALERT] System shutdown in 10 minutes
When parsing this reply, imap_parse will produce a warning "System
shutdown in 10 minutes", which is exactly what RFC requires.
> Also, I'm a bit uncomfortable with the direct use of the value of sp/sp1.
> The value is not documented (at least not in the man page), and in
> principle an implementation could store the end of the previous string
> there instead of the first character after it.
Yes, I agree with that. I plan a rewrite of the IMAP client part, which
should also fix this. Stay in touch for updates:)
Regards,
Sergey
_______________________________________________
Bug-mailutils mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-mailutils
