[postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Eli Zaretskii]

What does this message mean?  I get these almost every time I reply to
a message that came from the bug tracker.  How can I avoid this
nuisance?

While at that, another related question: why am I receiving 4 copies
of every message I send in response to a bug tracker message?  2 of
them are probably due to the fact that I'm subscribed to bug-gnu-emacs
and to emacs-pretest-bug (if I unsubscribe, will I miss some messages
posted by humans to those lists?).  But what about the other 2 copies?

------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:26:41 +0300 (IDT)
From: Internet Mail Delivery <postmaster@012.net.il>
Subject: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed
To: eliz@gnu.org


- --Boundary_(ID_q0t8duE2sK94IQv73Y6Jdg)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-language: en-US

This report relates to a message you sent with the following header fields:

  Message-id: <ulk0pd2jh.fsf@gnu.org>
  Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:04:02 +0300
  From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
  To: Markus Triska <markus.triska@gmx.at>
  Subject: Re: bug#496: 23.0.60; ispell-word becomes increasingly slower

Your message cannot be delivered to the following recipients:

  Recipient address: bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com
  Reason: Remote SMTP server has rejected address
  Diagnostic code: smtp;550 5.1.1 <bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com>... User unknown
  Remote system: dns;linnode.donarmstrong.com (TCP|84.95.2.1|44144|64.62.190.156|25)


- --Boundary_(ID_q0t8duE2sK94IQv73Y6Jdg)
Content-type: message/delivery-status

Reporting-MTA: dns;i_mtaout1.012.net.il (tcp-daemon)

Original-recipient: rfc822;bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com
Final-recipient: rfc822;bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1 (Remote SMTP server has rejected address)
Remote-MTA: dns;linnode.donarmstrong.com (TCP|84.95.2.1|44144|64.62.190.156|25)
Diagnostic-code: smtp;550 5.1.1 <bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com>... User
 unknown

- --Boundary_(ID_q0t8duE2sK94IQv73Y6Jdg)
Content-type: message/rfc822

Return-path: <eliz@gnu.org>
Received: from tcp-daemon.i-mtaout1.012.net.il by i-mtaout1.012.net.il
 (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0K360054RIW9B700@i-mtaout1.012.net.il>; Sat,
 28 Jun 2008 18:26:41 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([80.230.31.196])
 by i-mtaout1.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08)
 with ESMTPA id <0K3600HE0IK8PTV0@i-mtaout1.012.net.il> for
 bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com; Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:19:21 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:04:02 +0300
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#496: 23.0.60; ispell-word becomes increasingly slower
In-reply-to: <m1abh5zzab.fsf@gmx.at>
To: Markus Triska <markus.triska@gmx.at>
Cc: 496@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org,
 bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <ulk0pd2jh.fsf@gnu.org>
X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il
References: <20080628002655.A4921924848@mt-computer.local>
 <uod5mc9gf.fsf@gnu.org> <m1abh5zzab.fsf@gmx.at>

> From: Markus Triska <markus.triska@gmx.at>
> Cc: 496@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org,
> 	bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 11:25:48 +0200
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> check for memory leaks in aspell, I did:
> >> 
> >>    $ while true; do echo "test"; done | aspell -a
> >> 
> >> and in this case, aspell's memory usage seems to stay constant.
> >
> > Garbage collection?
> 
> I've received a better test case from the Aspell maintainer: 
> 
>   ( while true; do echo '!'; echo "-"; echo "%"; echo "^test"; done ) | aspell -a
> 
> According to him, it is the constant switching of modes that is causing
> a problem. He notes:
> 
>    "I have narrowed down the problem code. Technically it is not a leak
>    as the code is still reachable (according to valgrind), which makes
>    it harder to fix. I will let you know."
> 
> It is thus more an Aspell problem, but if it cannot be fixed in Aspell,
> I will look whether the Emacs side of communication can be improved.

But your test.el shows a similar problem with Ispell.  So either
Aspell and Ispell share the same problem, or Emacs still has something
to do with the slowdown.

- --Boundary_(ID_q0t8duE2sK94IQv73Y6Jdg)--
------- End of forwarded message -------

Re: [postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Don Armstrong]

On Sat, 28 Jun 2008, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> What does this message mean?  I get these almost every time I reply to
> a message that came from the bug tracker.  How can I avoid this
> nuisance?

Don't send messages to bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com? [I don't know
where that's comming from, since AFAIK nothing uses that.]
 
> While at that, another related question: why am I receiving 4 copies
> of every message I send in response to a bug tracker message? 

You're probably sending them to more than just the bug number.


Don Armstrong

-- 
If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its
freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money it
values more, it will lose that, too.
 -- W. Somerset Maugham

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Re: [postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Stefan Monnier]

>> What does this message mean?  I get these almost every time I reply to
>> a message that came from the bug tracker.  How can I avoid this
>> nuisance?

> Don't send messages to bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com? [I don't know
> where that's comming from, since AFAIK nothing uses that.]

Not sure where it might have come from, but I've seen it many times.
 
>> While at that, another related question: why am I receiving 4 copies
>> of every message I send in response to a bug tracker message? 

> You're probably sending them to more than just the bug number.

The message's header contains too many addresses.  E.g. the message
I got for bug#497 has:

   From: robert marshall <robert@capuchin.co.uk>
   Subject: bug#497: view-hello-file documentation
   To: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org
   Cc: 
   Reply-To: robert marshall <robert@capuchin.co.uk>, 497@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com

- emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org is an alias for
  submit@emacsbug.donarmstrong.com, so it needs to be removed.
- IIUC all email sent to 497@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com will be
  forwarded to bug-gnu-emacs's recipients as well as to the Robert
  Marshall <robert@capuchin.co.uk>, so "robert marshall
  <robert@capuchin.co.uk>" shouldn't be in the reply-to.  Actually,
  I think the above should read as follows instead (without any
  "reply-to"):

   From: robert marshall <robert@capuchin.co.uk>
   Subject: bug#497: view-hello-file documentation
   To: 497@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com

this way the usual "followup / reply to all" and "reply to author" both
do what they're supposed to do.


        Stefan

Re: [postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Miles Bader]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
> The message's header contains too many addresses.  E.g. the message
> I got for bug#497 has:
>
>    From: robert marshall <robert@capuchin.co.uk>
>    To: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org
>    Reply-To: robert marshall <robert@capuchin.co.uk>, 497@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com
...
> Actually, I think the above should read as follows instead (without
> any "reply-to"):
>
>    From: robert marshall <robert@capuchin.co.uk>
>    To: 497@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com
>
> this way the usual "followup / reply to all" and "reply to author" both
> do what they're supposed to do.

Yeah; the former sort of reply-to munging usually seems to cause far
more harm than good...

-Miles

-- 
Bacchus, n. A convenient deity invented by the ancients as an excuse for
getting drunk.

Re: [postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:35:35 -0700
> From: Don Armstrong <don@donarmstrong.com>
> 
> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > What does this message mean?  I get these almost every time I reply to
> > a message that came from the bug tracker.  How can I avoid this
> > nuisance?
> 
> Don't send messages to bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com?

I didn't; I just hit `r' in Rmail.  So that address was on the
original message already.

> > While at that, another related question: why am I receiving 4 copies
> > of every message I send in response to a bug tracker message? 
> 
> You're probably sending them to more than just the bug number.

Again, I just hit `r'.  If Rmail should be fixed, please tell what
does it do incorrectly, but let's not have an Emacs bug tracker that
doesn't work well with an Emacs MUA.

Re: [postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Sven Joachim]

On 2008-06-29 05:14 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>> Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:35:35 -0700
>> From: Don Armstrong <don@donarmstrong.com>
>> 
>> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> > What does this message mean?  I get these almost every time I reply to
>> > a message that came from the bug tracker.  How can I avoid this
>> > nuisance?
>> 
>> Don't send messages to bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com?
>
> I didn't; I just hit `r' in Rmail.  So that address was on the
> original message already.

It was in the "Resent-To" field, and rmail-reply includes that in the
list of addresses for the reply.  That does not seem to comply to RFC
2822 which states:

   Resent fields are used to identify a message as having been
   reintroduced into the transport system by a user.  The purpose of
   using resent fields is to have the message appear to the final
   recipient as if it were sent directly by the original sender, with
   all of the original fields remaining the same.  Each set of resent
   fields correspond to a particular resending event.  That is, if a
   message is resent multiple times, each set of resent fields gives
   identifying information for each individual time.  Resent fields are
   strictly informational.  They MUST NOT be used in the normal
   processing of replies or other such automatic actions on messages.

>> > While at that, another related question: why am I receiving 4 copies
>> > of every message I send in response to a bug tracker message? 
>> 
>> You're probably sending them to more than just the bug number.
>
> Again, I just hit `r'.  If Rmail should be fixed, please tell what
> does it do incorrectly, but let's not have an Emacs bug tracker that
> doesn't work well with an Emacs MUA.

I think Rmail should be fixed to not send replies to Resent-* addresses.

Sven

Re: [postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de>
> Cc: Don Armstrong <don@donarmstrong.com>,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 09:46:27 +0200
> 
> I think Rmail should be fixed to not send replies to Resent-* addresses.

Maybe, but it's kinda scary: this code has been in Rmail since October
1996.

Re: [postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Stefan Monnier]

>> I think Rmail should be fixed to not send replies to Resent-* addresses.
> Maybe, but it's kinda scary: this code has been in Rmail since October
> 1996.

That's probably why it needs to be updated: the RFC is pretty clear.
Can you take care of it?


        Stefan

Re: [postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de>,  don@donarmstrong.com,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 14:11:21 -0400
> 
> >> I think Rmail should be fixed to not send replies to Resent-* addresses.
> > Maybe, but it's kinda scary: this code has been in Rmail since October
> > 1996.
> 
> That's probably why it needs to be updated: the RFC is pretty clear.
> Can you take care of it?

Yes, but I won't have time until 4 weeks from now.  If it can wait,
then fine.

Btw, why does the bug tracker need these headers?  Fixing the above
won't help those who use older Emacsen, so if using the headers is not
really necessary, perhaps we should lose them nonetheless?

Re: [postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Stefan Monnier]

>> >> I think Rmail should be fixed to not send replies to Resent-* addresses.
>> > Maybe, but it's kinda scary: this code has been in Rmail since October
>> > 1996.
>> 
>> That's probably why it needs to be updated: the RFC is pretty clear.
>> Can you take care of it?

> Yes, but I won't have time until 4 weeks from now.  If it can wait,
> then fine.

I do not think this is urgent, indeed.  As long as you don't forget.

> Btw, why does the bug tracker need these headers?  Fixing the above
> won't help those who use older Emacsen, so if using the headers is not
> really necessary, perhaps we should lose them nonetheless?

I don't know why debbugs adds those Resent-* (or is it
added elsewhere?) fields.  Don?


        Stefan

Re: [postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Don Armstrong]

On Sun, 29 Jun 2008, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > Btw, why does the bug tracker need these headers? Fixing the above
> > won't help those who use older Emacsen, so if using the headers is
> > not really necessary, perhaps we should lose them nonetheless?
> 
> I don't know why debbugs adds those Resent-* (or is it
> added elsewhere?) fields.  Don?

They're useful to know where a particular message was dispatched, what
the new message-id is, what date it was dispatched, etc. Rewriting the
original fields is kind of wrong when you're resending mail, so that's
why the Resent-* fields were created in the RFC, and that's why
debbugs uses them.

Anything that uses them to produce replies is just broken, and should
be fixed. [That few things use Resent-*; is probably the only reason
why it hasn't been noticed before.]


Don Armstrong

-- 
Build a fire for a man, an he'll be warm for a day.  Set a man on   
fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
 -- Jules Bean

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Re: [postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 11:45:01 -0700
> From: Don Armstrong <don@donarmstrong.com>
> 
> > I don't know why debbugs adds those Resent-* (or is it
> > added elsewhere?) fields.  Don?
> 
> They're useful to know where a particular message was dispatched, what
> the new message-id is, what date it was dispatched, etc. Rewriting the
> original fields is kind of wrong when you're resending mail

I didn't say rewrite the original fields.  But you could have used
some X-something header, like everybody else does.

> Anything that uses them to produce replies is just broken, and should
> be fixed.

There are probably a gazillion broken MUAs out there.  While I agree
they should be either fixed or abandoned, there's no need to punish
their users who probably don't even know Resent-to exists.  They just
want to report a bug.

Re: [postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Don Armstrong]

On Sun, 29 Jun 2008, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 11:45:01 -0700
> > From: Don Armstrong <don@donarmstrong.com>
>
> I didn't say rewrite the original fields. But you could have used
> some X-something header, like everybody else does.

X-* headers are non-standard, and using them to do anything not
application-specific is broken.
 
> > Anything that uses them to produce replies is just broken, and
> > should be fixed.
> 
> There are probably a gazillion broken MUAs out there.

Sure, but that's their user's and developer's problem, not mine.

I'm willing to work around broken MUAs when I can do so, but I won't
do it at the expense of non-broken MUAs which follow the appropriate
RFCs. Lots of MUAs are capable of showing the information in Resent-*:
correctly, and utilizing it properly.


Don Armstrong

-- 
She was alot like starbucks.
IE, generic and expensive.
 -- hugh macleod http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archives/001376.html

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu