Issue with your exim port's Makefile

[David Fisher]

Hi,

  I am sorry this got all out of hand, I guess you are folowing RFC's
but it seem Outlook and Outlook Express are not allowing the ";" in there,
but thanks for fixing it now, it was introduced in Exim v4.24 I believe, as 
it
was not in the Exim v4.22 FreeBSD Port.

Thanks much again for the quick fix to the port,
-dave

>From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier at fillmore-labs.com>
>To: Ceri Davies <ceri at submonkey.net>
>CC: Edwin Groothuis <edwin at mavetju.org>, ports at freebsd.org,        David 
>Fisher <fisherds74 at hotmail.com>, eik at freebsd.org
>Subject: Re: Issue with your exim port's Makefile
>Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 12:43:25 +0200
>
>Ceri Davies wrote:
>
>>On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 10:28:53AM +1000, Edwin Groothuis wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 03:36:47PM -0700, David Fisher wrote:
>>>
>>>>RFC 822 :
>>>
>>>RFC0822 is obsoleted, please see RFC2822, paragraph 3.2.3.
>>
>>Guys, come on.  We've been told that it causes problems, and it will
>>take all of 4 seconds to fix (literally).  Can't we just do it?
>
>No, we can't. Pushing to do a quick fix to a minor glitch is normally not
>a good idea, working together to fully understand the problem, work around
>it and test the fix is. Normally I try to test my changes for more than
>four seconds.
>
>I will change this, actually I had it changed in my local copy, but it
>didn't made it with the latest upgrade. As you may have noticed I made an
>offer to change it in my response, but wanted to know which RFC I'm 
>breaking,
>since the offered alternative `:' did not look much different too me, 
>RFC-wise.
>I just wanted to figure out whether I'm really working around another bug 
>in
>the various forms of Outlook, or if the problem goes deeper.
>
>You also may have noticed that I tried to clarify this privately (removing 
>the CC of questions@), so please don't criticize people that are only 
>trying to help (since they have been asked to do so by the submitter). It 
>is something
>totally different to work around a bug in Outlook (any other character than 
>`;'
>will do) or a RFC violation (where `:' would probably have been illegal, 
>too).
>
>To restate: Of course I will add an workaround for Outlook bugs if they 
>don't
>introduce new problems, but I have to understand the problem before just 
>doing
>*something* that will break another mailer. I'm not a big fan of 
>harum-scarum
>patches. Probably the Debian way (using nested comments) is the way to go.
>
>-Oliver