From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 19354 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2021 08:41:00 -0000 Received: from mx1.math.uh.edu (129.7.128.32) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 2 Jun 2021 08:41:00 -0000 Received: from lists1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.208]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1loMQs-00BHJt-8k for ml@inbox.vuxu.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 03:40:58 -0500 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by lists1.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1loMQr-000FzF-Mu for ml@inbox.vuxu.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 03:40:57 -0500 Received: from mx1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.32]) by lists1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1loMQp-000Fz7-Fp for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 03:40:55 -0500 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1loMQl-00BHJf-06 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 03:40:55 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=MQ6t2oJS5A/HgPvJvmxoWn5+2Q9kCHzrfjrijv7QX8Y=; b=tZM706wpGOJOxxTJMDuag/Hp3k xCiiBMYjHmHHaGIChbsnKJQwALahQjT8bTM3DbOYAONkPXSvOwcTD65YdVJqJQwZbgQgefKdDfrIh MeYtZXFV0y2Ye1DTV7pWUpfPrL9wrwU8lVVknzu2018aEqdKnd8Sg59hzB6ekvwClGZ0=; Received: from www1564.sakura.ne.jp ([219.94.163.204]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1loMQb-0003w5-20 for ding@gnus.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 10:40:46 +0200 Received: from cumulonimbus.local (i219-165-237-176.s02.a013.ap.plala.or.jp [219.165.237.176]) (authenticated bits=0) by www1564.sakura.ne.jp (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 1528eJ7u012305 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 2 Jun 2021 17:40:19 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from hirotaka@hondalaw.com) From: Hirotaka Honda To: Eric Abrahamsen Cc: ding@gnus.org Subject: Re: (wrong-type-argument number-or-marker-p nil) error at gnus startup References: <87o8cwlia5.fsf@free.fr> <878s3yu6l3.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <977D30E3-06DB-46F7-BDC9-933E591A5E78@hondalaw.com> <87tumhsiw6.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2021 17:40:19 +0900 In-Reply-To: <87tumhsiw6.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> (Eric Abrahamsen's message of "Tue, 01 Jun 2021 08:29:29 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (darwin) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-ID: Precedence: bulk Dear all After I commented out gnus-registry as the following, any errors (or the same errors) happened again. ;; (gnus-registry-initialize) ;; (setq ;; gnus-registry-split-strategy 'majority ;; gnus-registry-ignored-groups '( ;; ("nntp" t) ;; ("nnrss" t) ;; ("mail.spam" t) ;; ("archive" t) ;; ("Send-Mail" t)) ;; gnus-registry-track-extra nil ;; gnus-registry-max-entries 500000) ;; (setq spam-log-to-registry t) Hirotaka Honda Eric Abrahamsen writes: > On 06/01/21 22:30 PM, Hirotaka Honda wrote: >> Dear all >> >> I am not certian what is happening, though the most dubious mail has >> the email header like this: >> >> X-From-Line: - Fri May 28 HH:MM:SS 2021 [I masked the time] >> X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 >> X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 >> ... >> From: =?iso-2022-jp?B?[mask]?= <[mask]@outlook.jp> >> To: =?utf-8?B?[mask]?= >> =?utf-8?B?[mask]?= <[mask]@[mask]> >> Cc: =?iso-2022-jp?B?[mask]?= >> =?iso-2022-jp?B?[mask]=?= <[mask]@[mask]>, >> "[mask]@[mask]" <[mask]@[mask]> >> ... >> X-Mailer: JavaMail >> >> Does the Gnus expect that To field and Cc field are coded in different ways? > > That shouldn't be a problem, the decoding process is called once for > each header, and each time it detects the coding over again. > > My only uncertainty is, should the headers somehow be already decoded at > this point (during registry operation), and if so and we're just missing > a decode call, why hasn't this become an issue in the past? I suspect we > just need to add decoding to the process, but it still makes me suspicious.