Re: [Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-27 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 08:46 +0800, jacky wrote: --- Jeffrey Stedfast [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 00:20 +0800, jacky wrote: It seem that your patch don't support this kind of encoded string: =?gb2312?b?any-encoded-text?==?gb2312?b?any-encoded-text?= Two

Re: [Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-27 Thread Philip Van Hoof
These warnings might be unimportant. But fyi ==32055== ==32055== Thread 3: ==32055== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) ==32055==at 0x4023BC7: memchr (mc_replace_strmem.c:354) ==32055==by 0x5054F8D: rfc2047_decode_word (camel-mime-utils.c:1060) ==32055==by

Re: [Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-27 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Thanks for the info, I'll have a closer look when I get back from holiday. My guess is that Conditional jumps can safely be ignored as they are probably due to some code optimization hack inside memchr() but the others I'm not sure about. I've committed a possible fix for them (only bug I could

Re: [Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-26 Thread jacky
It seem that your patch don't support this kind of encoded string: =?gb2312?b?any-encoded-text?==?gb2312?b?any-encoded-text?= Two encoded-words are not separated by any character. --- Jeffrey Stedfast [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: This patch is a port of my GMime rfc2047 decoder which is even more

Re: [Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-26 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 00:20 +0800, jacky wrote: It seem that your patch don't support this kind of encoded string: =?gb2312?b?any-encoded-text?==?gb2312?b?any-encoded-text?= Two encoded-words are not separated by any character. Are you sure? I wrote the code to be able to handle this case

Re: [Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-26 Thread jacky
--- Jeffrey Stedfast [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 00:20 +0800, jacky wrote: It seem that your patch don't support this kind of encoded string: =?gb2312?b?any-encoded-text?==?gb2312?b?any-encoded-text?= Two encoded-words are not separated by any character. Are you

Re: [Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-25 Thread Philip Van Hoof
Awesome! In the afternoon I started with the exact same port, but had to pause because of family visiting, I'm back home and you have it finished :). Thanks a lot! Brought it to tny's camel. FYI: http://tinymail.org/trac/tinymail/changeset/3203 On Tue, 2007-12-25 at 19:28 -0500, Jeffrey

Re: [Evolution-hackers] improved rfc2047 decode patch

2007-12-25 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
I noticed that the while (camel_mime_is_dtext(*inptr) *inptr) got reversed in your camel-lite patch, which must mean that you had locally changed the code to do the *inptr check first... I think your change was correct, we should be checking *inptr first before passing it to