On Sun, Jan 11, 2026 at 10:46:07AM +0000, Crystal Kolipe via Mutt-dev wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2026 at 09:16:17AM +0000, Yao Zi via Mutt-dev wrote:
> > Let's stop bailing out early when failing to decode the first SASL
> > challenge as base64. Instead, print a debug message and then try to
> > continue the authentication process for better compatibility with these
> > quirky service providers.
>
> This version of the patch looks OK to me, but should we really log exactly the
> same error message when ignoring the initial non-compliant server response
> that we log when erroring out on a subsequent failure?
>
> Could we either skip logging the error altogether in the first case or change
> the text to a warning, to avoid potential confusion in future bug reports?
I think the message ("pop_auth_sasl: error base64-decoding server
response") is enough to find out what's happening as long as
you search it through the codebase (and then find the comment added in
this patch). So I don't think it would cause confusion in future bug
reports.
If you still think it's important to make handling of the initial
non-compliant challenges stand out, I'd prefer to add an additional
debug message or mutt_message() for it. It's better to describe what's
happening clearly than saying nothing :)
Best regards,
Yao Zi
