Roman Maeder said:
[...explanation by threading fails ...]
instead of a message id. The reason is apparent if you look at the header
from which this information was extracted:
In-Reply-To: Message from Roman Maeder <maeder(_at_)mathconsult(_dot_)ch> of
"Mon, 1=
1 Nov
1996 17:39:19 +0100"
<199611111639(_dot_)RAA24975(_at_)prokyon(_dot_)mathconsult(_dot_)ch>=
=20
it extracts the contents of the first set of <>!
Is this header illegal, or should mhonarc be smarter?
Roman Maeder
I think that in-reply-to has to be a valid e-mail address. Therefore I
would say that this header is not legal. (Anyone with the RFC at hand?)
In mhonarc (2.0a2) the code that extracts the message is (see line 1145):
1137 ##----------------##
1138 ## Get References ##
1139 ##----------------##
1140 $tmp = $fields{'references'};
1141 while ($tmp =~ s/<([^>]+)>//) {
1142 push(@refs, $1);
1143 }
1144 $tmp = $fields{'in-reply-to'};
1145 if ($tmp =~ s/^[^<]*<([^>]*)>.*$/$1/) {
1146 push(@refs, $tmp) unless $tmp =~ /^\s*$/;
1147 }
1148
Because the current RE would fail to extract the message id on complicated
but valid e-mail you lose nothing in changing it to use the last pair of
<> instead of the first one. This should do it
1145 if ($tmp =~ s/^.*<([^>]*)>[^<]*$/$1/) {
Of course this quick fix would fail if you get also (wrong) in-reply-to
header fields where you have to use the first of two <>.
Achim