dovecot - Nov 2011 - patch for UID 0 problem

Hi all,

attached you'll find a patch for cmd-thread.c which addresses a problem with
certain clients in
conjunction with the use of the UID THREAD REFS command:

TAG5 UID THREAD REFS us-ascii SINCE 14-May-2011
* THREAD
(0)(246)(247)(248)(249)(250)(252)(253)(254)(255)(256)(257)(258)(259)(260)(261)(262)(263)(264)(265)(266)(267)(268)
TAG5 OK Thread completed.

The first UID delivered (0) is invalid, some clients - @mail for instance - then
try to fetch the
invalid UID 0 subsequently and run into problems.

The patch actually disables the return of (0) and seems to work for us. Please
review and - if OK -
incorporate it in the next version.

Best Regards
Kai


-- 
Kai Arif - System Administrator
Inter.net Germany GmbH
Knesebeckstra?e 59-61
10719 Berlin
Germany

Fon +49 30 25430 0
Fax +49 30 25430 499
arif at team.de.inter.net
www.de.inter.net

Legal-Information:
Inter.net Germany GmbH,
HRB #79136, Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg,
UST-IdNr:: DE 813 165 159
FA f?r K?rperschaften I Berlin,
Gesch?ftsf?hrer: J?rn Lubkoll

Zust?ndige Regulierungsbeh?rde:
Bundesnetzagentur Chemnitz, Liselotte-Herrmann-Str. 20a, 09127 Chemnitz,
Registriernummer: 06/164

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cmd-thread.c.diff
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 644 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20111114/03a916e2/attachment-0004.bin>

On 14.11.2011, at 11.51, Kai Arif wrote:
> attached you'll find a patch for cmd-thread.c which addresses a problem
with certain clients in
> conjunction with the use of the UID THREAD REFS command:
> 
> TAG5 UID THREAD REFS us-ascii SINCE 14-May-2011
> * THREAD
>
(0)(246)(247)(248)(249)(250)(252)(253)(254)(255)(256)(257)(258)(259)(260)(261)(262)(263)(264)(265)(266)(267)(268)
> TAG5 OK Thread completed.
> 
> The first UID delivered (0) is invalid, some clients - @mail for instance -
then try to fetch the
> invalid UID 0 subsequently and run into problems.
Yes, it is. It should never happen.
> The patch actually disables the return of (0) and seems to work for us.
Please review and - if OK -
> incorporate it in the next version.
Could you instead send me such a mailbox where you can reproduce this problem?
Probably sending dovecot.index, dovecot.index.log and dovecot.index.thread files
would be enough. None of those contain any sensitive information.