GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 615443
evolution adds missing Date: (when non-rfc compliant sender "forgets" it) but still only shows "?" in message list
Last modified: 2018-10-25 16:29:55 UTC
Hello, this is a forwarded bug from http://bugs.debian.org/507431 example email: Return-path: <x@x.e> Envelope-to: y@y.e Delivery-date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 07:53:06 +0000 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]) by mail.y.e with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <x@x.e>) id 1L73ac-0006JR-1S for y@y.e; Mon, 01 Dec 2008 07:53:06 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 01 Dec 2008 07:42:27 -0000 Received: from collect02.o2online.de (EHLO SGBMCAPP03) [82.113.101.26] by mail.gmx.net (mp039) with SMTP; 01 Dec 2008 08:42:27 +0100 X-Authenticated: #28825183 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+IH8IA3nqIu7eAFCVs3adIxw7oAvQp2c9Mn+YOBz ypD8WuWB5LAUnS From: "X X" <x@x.e> To: <y@y.e> Reply-To: <x@x.e> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?AW:_Re:_Subject?= X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: O3SIS o2 Communication Center Mail 6.00.00 2003-09-04 Cologne Edition Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.6 X-Evolution-Source: imap://y@mail.y.e/ Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 10:16:45 +0100 AFAIK the sender is not rfc compliant because the Date: was missing (chronological it should be before the Received: timestamps). The recieving MTA is exim and adds the Delivery-date: when Date: is missing. http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.feedback.thunderbird/browse_thread/thread/660e4120fdd46064/5a8ee00b236f52b0 Evolution adds the X-Evolution-Source: and because Date: is added after that I think evolution adds the Date: when its missing in the header. Can you confirm that evolution is doing this? The problem is, that evolution still displays "?" as date even with the later added Date: line. So the bug is that evolution adds Date: but don't display it. in short: - when a sender is not rfc-compliant and don't add a Date: line - we guess evolution adds the missing Date: line - but doing this wrong because after the addition to the header its still not shown in evolution thx for your comments on this.
Thanks for a bug report. This had been addressed in bug #769620, thus I mark this as a duplicate of it. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 769620 ***