[rt-users] bad rfc822 field name? (fwd)

[matt carter]

hi all,

i have done some further investigation of my problem and it would appear
that pine may be the culprit. i was hoping some other people may have an
opinion on this, and an appropriate way to deal with.

my suggestion would be to check for presence of : on the line before we
assume its part of a new header line?


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 12:25:35 +1000 (EST)
From: matt carter <matt at iseek.com.au>
To: Jesse Vincent <jesse at bestpractical.com>
Subject: bad rfc822 field name?

hey jesse,

i found this problem still in 2.0.9 with long subject lines and it has me
baffled but i think ive got it nailed.

webrt:/var/log/rt# cat rt.log.6758.1
Bad RFC822 field name ' Needed'
 at /opt/local/packages/rt2/lib/RT/Template.pm line 297
Bad RFC822 field name ' Needed'
 at /opt/local/packages/rt2/lib/RT/Template.pm line 297
webrt:/var/log/rt#

actual subject was

-snip-
Subject: (mercury) remove dialup account for barry nillsen lawyers no longer needed
-snip-


it looks like rt seems to chop the subject when it gets to a certain
length and i'm getting 1 error per template. in the above there is
two erors because i have oncreate notify owner, notify group.

whats interesting is if i display the ticket the title bar at the top says

-snip-
RT/iseek-track: Ticket #540 (mercury) remove dialup account for barry nillsen lawyers no longer needed
-snip-

which is a complete subject yet when you actually look at the ticket
history you can see that the word "Needed" which caused rt to barf has
been excluded from the subject line.

so in one sense it's fine, but in another it's broken so i definately know
i'm not going crazy :)

-snip-
History
Display mode: [Brief headers] [Full headers]
         Fri Nov 23 11:24:17 2001
                                                  matt - Ticket created
[Reply] [Comment]

         Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 11:24:14 +1000 (EST)
         From: matt carter <matt at iseek.com.au>
         To: <support at iseek.com.au>
         Subject: (mercury) remove dialup account for barry nillsen
lawyers no longer

-snip-


Further investigation shows there is a new line in the subject alright.

mysql> select Subject from Tickets where id = 540;
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Subject
|
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| (mercury) remove dialup account for barry nillsen lawyers no longer
 needed |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)

mysql>

You can see below that quite a number of tickets have the same problem.


mysql> select count(Subject) from Tickets where Subject like "%\n%";
+----------------+
| count(Subject) |
+----------------+
|             18 |
+----------------+
1 row in set (0.01 sec)

mysql>


On further investigation I found this :

# cat r
From: matt at iseek.com.au
To: support at iseek.com.au
Subject: a long line with no new lines in it that i definately know and
was not long enough try again

some content

# cat r | sendmail -t

works fine. i get my auto reply.

-snip-
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 12:17:24 +1000
From: support <support at iseek.com.au>
To: matt at iseek.com.au
Subject: [iseek-track #548] a long line with no new lines in it that i
definately know and was not long enough try again

Thank you for emailing the iseek Communications Support Team.
-snip-

if i cut and paste the exact same subject into pine, and send it.

-snip-
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 12:17:09 +1000 (EST)
From: matt carter <matt at iseek.com.au>
To: support at iseek.com.au
Subject: a long line with no new lines in it that i definately know and was not long enough try again
-snip-

i get

Bad RFC822 field name ' Not Long Enough Try Again'
 at /opt/local/packages/rt2/lib/RT/Template.pm line 297
Bad RFC822 field name ' Not Long Enough Try Again'
 at /opt/local/packages/rt2/lib/RT/Template.pm line 297


so this appears to be a combination of two problems:

1. pine potentially? inserting a \n in the outbound message

2. rt not checking for the existence of : before we assume it's a header.

thoughts?


--matt