Package: bugs.debian.org Severity: normal Trying to send a follow-up (with some attached patches) to a bug report, I received this bounce message right away. Any tips for debugging it?
Jonathan
--- Begin Message ---Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently: 568149-forwar...@bugs.debian.org Technical details of permanent failure: Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the recipient domain. We recommend contacting the other email provider for further information about the cause of this error. The error that the other server returned was: 550 550 HELO mismatch Forged HELO for (mail-gy0-f52.google.com) (state 14). ----- Original message ----- Received: by 10.101.199.34 with SMTP id b34mr4772784anq.148.1266667665951; Sat, 20 Feb 2010 04:07:45 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: <jrnie...@gmail.com> Received: from progeny.tock (c-98-212-3-231.hsd1.il.comcast.net [98.212.3.231]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 22sm535313yxe.39.2010.02.20.04.07.43 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 20 Feb 2010 04:07:44 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 06:08:05 -0600 From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com> To: zlib-de...@madler.net, zlib-de...@zlib.net Cc: Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org>, 568149-forwar...@bugs.debian.org Subject: [PATCH v2 5/9] Change gz_zero() return value to represent a number of zeros Message-ID: <20100220120804.ga4...@progeny.tock> References: <20100202192235.ga30...@sirena.org.uk> <4e61f670-e8b8-4dc7-9f1a-35d9da5b1...@alumni.caltech.edu> <20100204100445.ga20...@sirena.org.uk> <20100204224915.ga3...@progeny.tock> <20100204230302.gf3...@progeny.tock> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20100204230302.gf3...@progeny.tock> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Jonathan Nieder wrote: > No change in behavior intended. [...] > /* check for seek request */ > if (state->seek) { > - state->seek = 0; > - if (gz_zero(state, state->skip) == -1) > + state->seek -= gz_zero(state, state->skip); > + if (state->seek) > return 0; > } This is nonsense. What I meant was if (state->skip) { state->skip -= gz_zero(state, state->skip); if (state->skip) return 0; } but that requires another change to work. To avoid filling up your inbox with more messages, I have attached the fixed patches starting at patch 5 to this message. The first two are new. The first makes sure to set state->skip to 0 at all the appropriate places so state->seek is no longer needed. The second removes a member from the gz_state structure, simplifying things conceptually. It probably ruins its layout with compilers that prefer to pack structures, so I’m not suggesting you apply that change as-is (there is no harm in skipping it). gzlib: Stop using gz_state.seek member gzguts: remove seek field from gz_state structure The third one is the patch I am replying to, fixed. Change gz_zero() return value to represent a number of zeros The remaining patches are as before, with minor changes to apply on top of the just mentioned changes. Allow resuming gz_zero() after a partial write Allow recovery from interruptions in gzclose_w() Allow resuming gzwrite() after a partial write Teach gz_load() to recover from interruptions Sorry for the confusion. Jonathan
--- End Message ---
