Don't translate the patch to UTF-8, instead preserve the data as
is. This also reverts a test case that was included in the
original patch series.
Also allow overwriting the authorship and title information we
gather from RFC2822 mail headers with additional in-body
headers, which was pointed out by Linus.
Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
I am working on a project that required parsing through regular
mboxes that didn't necessarily have patches embedded in them. I
started by creating my own modified copy of git-am and working
from there. Very quickly, I noticed git-mailinfo wasn't able to
handle a big chunk of my email.
After hacking up numerous solutions and running into more
limitations, I decided it was just easier to rewrite a big chunk
of it. The following patch has a bunch of fixes and features
that I needed in order for me do what I wanted.
Note: I'm didn't follow any email rfc papers but I don't think
any of the changes I did required much knowledge (besides the
boundary stuff).
List of major changes/fixes:
- can't create empty patch files fix
- empty patch files don't fail, this failure will come inside git-am
- multipart boundaries are now handled
- only output inbody headers if a patch exists otherwise assume those
headers are part of the reply and instead output the original headers
- decode and filter base64 patches correctly
- various other accidental fixes
I believe I didn't break any existing functionality or
compatibility (other than what I describe above, which is really
only the empty patch file).
I tested this through various mailing list archives and
everything seemed to parse correctly (a couple thousand emails).
[jc: squashed in another patch from Don's five patch series to
fix the test case, as this patch exposes the bug in the test.]
Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
It basically considers all the continuation lines to be lines of their
own, and if the total line is bigger than what we can fit in it, we just
truncate the result rather than stop in the middle and then get confused
when we try to parse the "next" line (which is just the remainder of the
first line).
[jc: added test, and tightened boundary a bit per list discussion.]
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Currently the test passes with 1.3.3 but not with the tip of
"master". This is to verify the fixes from Eric W Biedermann.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
