The existing code applies a user-settable format string to parsed headers to
generate
the scan listing. Part of how this works is to generate a list of headers
referenced
by the format string so that only those headers are extracted. However, this
doesn't
quite work in all cases. For example, this recent message from Earl:
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 12:30:37 CST
To: Jon Steinhart <jon(_at_)fourwinds(_dot_)com>
cc: nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
From: Earl Hood <earl(_at_)earlhood(_dot_)com>
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] character sets and localization
Return-Path: earlhood(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
Delivery-Date: Sat Nov 13 10:32:33 2010
Return-Path: <earlhood(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:received
:in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject
:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=e1pTfthwujlXK1apKyvhs+nsZNEe8XV1OqGdD8qr9oc=;
b=eb9C5xr177Yim0k/y+EOAud0SXI1BGRpVTi8Q9982OAnLjI0d3E5YMMDqhQhMfBKTi
9kPuaP2tL7132/W1UR98xZ9Xkqafj6BE57uhtypARLhHeeV5IjcfYaZR2zEilR+R7Do7
Vwqs9TNMCd+kFftJ1/UX6zD3lAQcWPlkD1L8w=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
b=IS/rdEVgugqAKKXOlkvCvwWLUPMlz3lgICdsbuFcwx70Rk64FElUebGvZpSZHga/c6
ByYcUMuZr1U0FPTreaZu6TitTTTJDH91eulLv0yvIowlp2hGbnylw/yfPlS5T7/3v6LV
EZ799tOZeihEt36WVUa4tpqHHaEOGX21PihHI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: earlhood(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
In-Reply-To:
<201011131750(_dot_)oADHo7Zi021313(_at_)darkstar(_dot_)fourwinds(_dot_)com>
References:
<201011131717(_dot_)oADHHnV8020548(_at_)darkstar(_dot_)fourwinds(_dot_)com>
<84450(_dot_)1289670302(_at_)localhost>
<201011131750(_dot_)oADHo7Zi021313(_at_)darkstar(_dot_)fourwinds(_dot_)com>
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 1KTQ8_dSmNGH2kLYPSk_Vb-4Ezk
Note that there are two Return-Path header fields. If you do a scan -format
"%{Return-Path}"
you'll get the value of the last one. Is that what we want? What is the
proper formatting
of header fields that occur more than once. BTW, I haven't checked, but I'd
guess that this
is a memory leak!
Jon
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers