On 22/05/25, Rich Kulawiec (r...@gsp.org) wrote: > On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 05:26:25PM -0400, Kurt Hackenberg wrote: > > Nope, sorry. RFC 4155 has a problem. Its default format, the only one it > > defines, defines the From_ line rigidly, forbids ">From " escaping, and does > > not use a length. It says messages should be found by recognizing the whole > > From_ line, with exact syntax. ...
> I agree that this is a problem. But I don't agree with the (elided for > brevity) suggestion that we should collectively ignore the RFC, ... > And then someone(s) will need to look at formail(1), grepmail(1), and > other mail tools to try to figure out what works/breaks with what. > I'm already staring at grepmail for other reasons, so I'll make a note > to circle back to this issue. Possibly off-topic, but I think grepmail uses Mail::Mbox::MessageParser, at least for the message parsing if not the "From" escaping. https://metacpan.org/pod/Mail::Mbox::MessageParser This uses Config.pm which defines the start of a message as: 'from_pattern' => q/(?mx)^ (From\s # Skip names, months, days (?> [^:\n]+ ) # Match time (?: :\d\d){1,2} # Match time zone (EST), hour shift (+0500), and-or year (?: \s+ (?: [A-Z]{2,6} | [+-]?\d{4} ) ){1,3} # smail compatibility (\sremote\sfrom\s.*)? )/, See https://metacpan.org/release/DCOPPIT/Mail-Mbox-MessageParser-1.5111/source/lib/Mail/Mbox/MessageParser/Config.pm#L25 sub _read_rest_of_email in Perl.pm looks pretty gnarly. Is grepmail considered a reference tool?
