lurker-users — Lurker user support

[Lurker-users] File extension for raw messages

[Keyang Li <key...@li...>]

Hi,



In ChangeLog



> v1.1:

> ...

>  Set Content-Type for raw messages to message/rfc822 to allow reply

> ...



I notice that, for a raw message, it will set content type to message/rfc822 , and set the file extension to .rfc822



I download an attachment with extension .rfc822 , but it is not recognized by Outlook. After changing the extension to .eml then it is recognized by Outlook



Also, I read from

http://justsolve.archiveteam.org/wiki/Internet_e-mail_message_format

in the table on this web page, the email message file format is associated with extension ".eml"



I think it we could change the extension ".rfc822" to ".eml" , it will be more easily recognized by applications, like Outlook



Thanks!

Re: [Lurker-users] Fwd: librejs complains about scripts on the lurker page

[Miroslav R. <mir...@cr...>]

On 161224-13:18+0530, shirish शिरीष wrote:
> Hi all,
> The debconf mail infrastructure uses lurker. I tried librejs
> 
> https://www.gnu.org/software/librejs/
> 
> and got the following errors on the page, could you please fix it.
> 
> Also is there a github page or is the project limited to
> sourceforge.net itself ?
> 
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/lurker/
> https://sourceforge.net/p/lurker/code/HEAD/tree/
> 
> Look forward to know more.
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: shirish शिरीष <shi...@gm...>
> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 15:24:27 +0530
> Subject: librejs complains about scripts on the lurker page
> To: debconf-discuss <deb...@li...>
> 
> Hi
>  all,
> 
> I dunno if this is a bug in lurker or somewhere else but librejs
> complains -
> 
> 
> List of blocked JavaScript in
> https://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20161219.152910.ede30580.en.html
> 
> 
>     Whitelist
> 
>     This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
> methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
>     <!--
>     textdate(1482140659);//-->
> 
>     Whitelist
> 
>     This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
> methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
>     <!--
>     textdate(1482163088);//-->
> 
>     Whitelist
> 
>     This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
> methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
>     <!--
>     textdate(1482161350);//-->
> 
>     Whitelist
> 
>     This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
> methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
>     <!--
>     timezone(1482161350);//-->
> 
>     Whitelist
> 
>     This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
> methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
>     [{"attribute":"onchange","value":"self.location=value;"}]
> 
>     Whitelist
> 
>     This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
> methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
>     [{"attribute":"onmouseover","value":"titledate(this,1482140659);"}]
> 
>     Whitelist
> 
>     This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
> methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
>     [{"attribute":"onmouseover","value":"titledate(this,1482161350);"}]
> 
>     Whitelist
> 
>     This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
> methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
>     [{"attribute":"onmouseover","value":"titledate(this,1482163088);"}]
> 
>     Whitelist
> 
>     This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
> methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
> 
> [{"attribute":"href","value":"trash('https://lists.debconf.org/lurker/zap/20161219.152910.ede30580.en.html');"}]
> 
> 
>     WhitelistNONTRIVIAL: creates script element dynamically.
>     https://lists.debconf.org/lurker/ui/common.js
> 
> List of accepted JavaScript in
> https://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20161219.152910.ede30580.en.html
> 
> 
>     LibreJS did not allow the execution of any scripts on this page: '
>         There may be no scripts on this page (check source, C-u)
>         The inline and on-page JavaScript code may not be free and/or
> may not have proper license information and external scripts (if
> present) may have been removed by default.
>         External scripts may not be free and/or may not have proper
> licensing and are not part of the whitelist of free JavaScript
> libraries.
> 
> -- 
>           Regards,
>           Shirish Agarwal  शिरीष अग्रवाल
>   My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
> http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com
> EB80 462B 08E1 A0DE A73A  2C2F 9F3D C7A4 E1C4 D2D8
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
> Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
> With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
> Training and support from Colfax.
> Order your platform today.http://sdm.link/intel
> _______________________________________________
> Lurker-users mailing list
> Lur...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lurker-users

I would like to join shirish. It would esp. be great if the mainteners
created a git repo of lurker development so far.

Regards!
-- 
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr

[Lurker-users] Fwd: librejs complains about scripts on the lurker page

[shirish श. <shi...@gm...>]

Hi all,
The debconf mail infrastructure uses lurker. I tried librejs

https://www.gnu.org/software/librejs/

and got the following errors on the page, could you please fix it.

Also is there a github page or is the project limited to
sourceforge.net itself ?

https://sourceforge.net/projects/lurker/
https://sourceforge.net/p/lurker/code/HEAD/tree/

Look forward to know more.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: shirish शिरीष <shi...@gm...>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 15:24:27 +0530
Subject: librejs complains about scripts on the lurker page
To: debconf-discuss <deb...@li...>

Hi
 all,

I dunno if this is a bug in lurker or somewhere else but librejs
complains -


List of blocked JavaScript in
https://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20161219.152910.ede30580.en.html


    Whitelist

    This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
    <!--
    textdate(1482140659);//-->

    Whitelist

    This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
    <!--
    textdate(1482163088);//-->

    Whitelist

    This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
    <!--
    textdate(1482161350);//-->

    Whitelist

    This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
    <!--
    timezone(1482161350);//-->

    Whitelist

    This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
    [{"attribute":"onchange","value":"self.location=value;"}]

    Whitelist

    This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
    [{"attribute":"onmouseover","value":"titledate(this,1482140659);"}]

    Whitelist

    This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
    [{"attribute":"onmouseover","value":"titledate(this,1482161350);"}]

    Whitelist

    This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts
    [{"attribute":"onmouseover","value":"titledate(this,1482163088);"}]

    Whitelist

    This script is detected as inline, nonfree, defining functions or
methods, and the rest of the page as loading external scripts

[{"attribute":"href","value":"trash('https://lists.debconf.org/lurker/zap/20161219.152910.ede30580.en.html');"}]


    WhitelistNONTRIVIAL: creates script element dynamically.
    https://lists.debconf.org/lurker/ui/common.js

List of accepted JavaScript in
https://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20161219.152910.ede30580.en.html


    LibreJS did not allow the execution of any scripts on this page: '
        There may be no scripts on this page (check source, C-u)
        The inline and on-page JavaScript code may not be free and/or
may not have proper license information and external scripts (if
present) may have been removed by default.
        External scripts may not be free and/or may not have proper
licensing and are not part of the whitelist of free JavaScript
libraries.

-- 
          Regards,
          Shirish Agarwal  शिरीष अग्रवाल
  My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com
EB80 462B 08E1 A0DE A73A  2C2F 9F3D C7A4 E1C4 D2D8

Re: [Lurker-users] Installing Lurker on Gentoo

[<mir...@cr...>]

On 150923-16:39+0200, mir...@cr... wrote:
> Need help creating ebuild for "lurker"
Pls. note (Wesley Terpstra didn't understand it in his summary reading
of my mails) that the title about the ebuild is not mine.

My method that I employed should work for any Linux, just like
./configure ; make ; make install do. But read the previous posts for
that.

> 
> And I'm not done yet.
> 

I have succeeded ion deploying what I needed Lurker for.

Have a look:

iskon-t-com-miro-rovis
http://www.croatiafidelis.hr/foss/cenz/iskon-t-com-miro-rovis/

Iskon is my previous provider, T-com is my current provider. I have
posted there my correspondence with them, and doing it with Lurker has
allowed me to do it in better than I expected.

Now, I'm teasing the (few) readers of this mailing list a little.

Somebody give me a guess, or at least ask how I did it.

There is one program that is needed to get that archive there. Which
one, and how did I do it?

I mean, after correct deployment of Lirker, and importing the mailing
list (in my case just correspondence with my providers), what was
necessary to do to get the frozen snapshot and then archive it, and
decompress it on my NGO's site http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr where you can see
it published?

---
Also I posted about lurker-users ML troubles a little (about the SF that
does not show mails correctly, but it's not the main topic there) here:

TLS (SSL) tcp stream decoding in your traffic dumps?
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1029408.html
(where SF wil feature in the screencast that I am, hopefully, yet to
post, at the time of writing this mail still not there)

Regards!
-- 
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr

Re: [Lurker-users] Installing Lurker on Gentoo

[<mir...@cr...>]

On 150918-13:41+0200, mir...@cr... wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:42:49PM +0200, mir...@cr... wrote:
> I thought I would desist, but let me see if I figured out that it was
> mistaken for me to sign the two patches and send the sigs as
> attachments, and if that confused SourceForge, since it is superfluous,
> since the whole mail was signed.
> 
> This is sufficient, in a PGP-signe email:
> > > ...
> > > > 3d965c59dd6adb7f2f9b9df8eb176512fa311cbd6d50ed178af5eb6ce407851a
> > > > mimelib1_1.1.4_configure.in.patch
> > > > f86d8dd42f1b74e5cc81a8cb9d7505cad2d0a1f1d5b2dd99e843e1a1ad2bfba7
> > > > mimelib1_1.1.4_Makefile.am.patch
This sadness that it can't be posted, is probably a SourceForge issue...
If it is incompatibility with my Mutt, well you can't afford to allow
that, you have to fix that... Have a look, similarly, attachments could
not appear as long as two years ago, on SourceForge:

while they show fine in (probably, haven't checked but the main one) any
mutt-users mailing lis, contained in the following, old, email of mine:

WARNING: skip to 'WARNING END' for talk on Lurker
I mailed to Courier Maildrop list on SourceForge, in 2013: 

My standalone maildrop configuration files 
http://sourceforge.net/p/courier/mailman/message/31585709/ 
( the first message, and it seems some troubles SF has with web for
mail, you can only see it if you, near 2013-10-31 19:18:00, 
click on: 
Message as HTML which opens it...) 

But, luckily, I also mailed it to mutt-users Mailing List! Where find it
in the second of two messages: 

Namespace with/without on dovecot server on/off and issues 
http://marc.info/?l=mutt-users&m=138178557223737&w=2 

this one (of same subject line): 
http://marc.info/?l=mutt-users&m=138178696024182&w=2 
WARNING END

I have make more progress in my Lurker installation, and explanation.

Pls. go to:

Need help creating ebuild for "lurker"
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-228582.html#7816588

And I'm not done yet.

Regards!

-- 
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr

Re: [Lurker-users] Installing Lurker on Gentoo

[<mir...@cr...>]

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:42:49PM +0200, mir...@cr... wrote:
I thought I would desist, but let me see if I figured out that it was
mistaken for me to sign the two patches and send the sigs as
attachments, and if that confused SourceForge, since it is superfluous,
since the whole mail was signed.

This is sufficient, in a PGP-signe email:
> > ...
> > > 3d965c59dd6adb7f2f9b9df8eb176512fa311cbd6d50ed178af5eb6ce407851a
> > > mimelib1_1.1.4_configure.in.patch
> > > f86d8dd42f1b74e5cc81a8cb9d7505cad2d0a1f1d5b2dd99e843e1a1ad2bfba7
> > > mimelib1_1.1.4_Makefile.am.patch

and (but this is really my last ditch attmpt), find
> mimelib1_1.1.4_configure.in.patch
> mimelib1_1.1.4_Makefile.am.patch
attached without any superfluous signatures like before.

Otherwise, if they still does not arrive correctly, this will still be
my plea:
> 
> And if they still don't arrive correctly, and verifiably signed, pls.
> can some of the other subscirbers to the list, soon or some day in the
> future that it be, post them so they be publically available, please?
> Surely there'll be other people wanting to use Lurker, because it's
> really so much better than mailman, and this method is non-Debian
> specific, and probably non-Gentoo specific, the method that I used.
> 

Regards!
-- 
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr

Re: [Lurker-users] Installing Lurker on Gentoo

[<mir...@cr...>]

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:13:49PM +0200, mir...@cr... wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 01:13:59AM +0200, mir...@cr... wrote:
> ...
> > Need help creating ebuild for "lurker"
> > https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-228582.html#7712344
> ...
> > pls. find the paches:
> > 
> > mimelib1_1.1.4_configure.in.patch
> > mimelib1_1.1.4_Makefile.am.patch
The message sent a little while ago shows correctly on SourceForge web,
and my PGP-sig on the message verifiable, so let me complete the first
part about Gentoo (currently out-of-portage, but working) install, the
installing of the mimelib, for which these two pathes that I am
attaching again:
> ...
> > 3d965c59dd6adb7f2f9b9df8eb176512fa311cbd6d50ed178af5eb6ce407851a
> > mimelib1_1.1.4_configure.in.patch
> > f86d8dd42f1b74e5cc81a8cb9d7505cad2d0a1f1d5b2dd99e843e1a1ad2bfba7
> > mimelib1_1.1.4_Makefile.am.patch
are needed. Pls. find them attached. Both the
mimelib1_1.1.4_configure.in.patch and the
mimelib1_1.1.4_Makefile.am.patch and their sigs.

And if they still don't arrive correctly, and verifiably signed, pls.
can some of the other subscirbers to the list, soon or some day in the
future that it be, post them so they be publically available, please?
Surely there'll be other people wanting to use Lurker, because it's
really so much better than mailman, and this method is non-Debian
specific, and probably non-Gentoo specific, the method that I used.

Regards!
-- 
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr

Re: [Lurker-users] Installing Lurker on Gentoo

[<mir...@cr...>]

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 01:13:59AM +0200, mir...@cr... wrote:
...
> Need help creating ebuild for "lurker"
> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-228582.html#7712344
...
> pls. find the paches:
> 
> mimelib1_1.1.4_configure.in.patch
> mimelib1_1.1.4_Makefile.am.patch
...
> 3d965c59dd6adb7f2f9b9df8eb176512fa311cbd6d50ed178af5eb6ce407851a
> mimelib1_1.1.4_configure.in.patch
> f86d8dd42f1b74e5cc81a8cb9d7505cad2d0a1f1d5b2dd99e843e1a1ad2bfba7
> mimelib1_1.1.4_Makefile.am.patch

The subscribers to lurker-users, if they got the same email as this one
to which I am replying (see the:
In-Reply-To: <20150917231359.GB16012@g0n>
in the headers)...
The subscribers, if that is the case, got the two patches correctly, and
signed correctly.

To not clutter this ML, and to attempt to accomplish that the patches be
available publically in the correct way, and not only, if you,
subscribers see the same what I see on the SorceForge web...  [and not
only] what can be seen at the HTML linked page:
http://sourceforge.net/p/lurker/mailman/attachment/20150917231359.GB16012%40g0n/1/
where nothing is easily verified...

So to not clutter this ML, did you get this previous message of mine
that I'm replying to <20150917231359.GB16012@g0n> correctly, except for
the signature of the entire message being bad...

I don't care how long it'll take, it doesn't even have to be today, but
I like finishing my work.

See also:
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-228582.html#7816346

Doesn't even have to be very soon, as I said, but I want to post all
about how I managed to install, as there I will probably need some help.

As I said, I do have a really bad provider, or it could be for other
reasons my messages didn't show correctly and completely, but I'm only
sending s PGP-signed message without attachments, this time.

I want to remind here that, say, this message of mine, to SourceForge:

http://sourceforge.net/p/courier/mailman/courier-maildrop/?viewmonth=201508

with this email account of mine, stil the same provider is now as then,
showed in that mailing list correctly, and also was, if other
subscribers got it like me, delivered to subscribers mailboxes, with
verifiable, and bad PGP signature of mine.

Cheers!
-- 
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr

[Lurker-users] Installing Lurker on Gentoo

[<mir...@cr...>]

There have been a few attempts for Lurker ebuild at:

Need help creating ebuild for "lurker"
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-228582.html

Lurker was however, abandoned in Gentoo sometime in 2009, I believe.

I think lurker is far better than mailman, such as, look up how great it
works for the Devuan project:

https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/list/dng.en.html

I'm only a fraction of a developer, far from a complete dev, which I'll
probably never be.

But I have put some effort into installing lurker on a non-Debian, and
no-Debian-derivative system, which is my Gentoo system, and I'm close to
having a complete out-of-Gentoo-portage installation.

Have a look at my posts in the Gentoo Forums topic link. or, for readers
convenience, from:
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-228582.html#7712344
(which is the same link as) in the top of this message, and which is
recent; it is all in this 2015th year after Ctrist.

For this first message, I only want to post the patches needed, to
install mimelib in Gentoo, and which couldn't be posted correctly on
Gentoo Forums due to phpBB not honoring tabs in beginning of Makefile.in
files.

See how I tried in vain to post the patches at:

https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-228582.html#7809388

and pls., Gentoo readers who are (hopefully) visiting this SF
email-to-webpages links that there should be a few here, with time, as I
might need to ask for a little help as well...

and pls., Gentoo readers, and I think the method applies fine to other
arches as well...

pls. find the paches:

mimelib1_1.1.4_configure.in.patch
mimelib1_1.1.4_Makefile.am.patch

in the attachments to this message.

And yes, they do still have the SHA256 posted on Gentoo Forums:

3d965c59dd6adb7f2f9b9df8eb176512fa311cbd6d50ed178af5eb6ce407851a
mimelib1_1.1.4_configure.in.patch
f86d8dd42f1b74e5cc81a8cb9d7505cad2d0a1f1d5b2dd99e843e1a1ad2bfba7
mimelib1_1.1.4_Makefile.am.patch


Note: tired and sleepy. Pls. check for possible *errata* in the next
message.

Good night for now!
-- 
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr

Re: [Lurker-users] How to prefer HTML if a message has both plain and HTML?

[Wesley W. T. <we...@te...>]

On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Kaz Kylheku <ka...@ky...> wrote:

> **
>
> My Lurker installation now has  a "html_filter" configuration option. Here
> you can specify a command to use to sanitize the HTML. If nothing is
> specified, there is no filtering.
>
Before you spend too much time on this, I just wanted to make sure you
understand that I have no intention of integrating these changes into the
official lurker package. I consider html an inherently dangerous and
constantly evolving language. There are practically no tags that cannot be
abused via the addition of javascript events. Even if you filter out was is
dangerous today, an updated HTML specification may make previously harmless
tags a vector for cross-site scripting attacks. See, for example, the
development of CSS.

If you want to filter HTML in your copy of lurker, go for it, but I will
not include what I consider an inherently unsafe feature in software I
distribute.

Re: [Lurker-users] How to prefer HTML if a message has both plain and HTML?

[Kaz K. <ka...@ky...>]

 

I have made more progress on this. 

My Lurker installation now has a "html_filter" configuration option.
Here you can specify a command to use to sanitize the HTML. If nothing
is specified, there is no filtering. 

I wrote a C utility to do the filtering, using GNU flex to scan, with
some minimal parsing logic on top of that. (Most likely a huge
reinvention of the wheel, but what the heck). 

It has a hard-coded white list of HTML4 tags, so it will nicely take out
all junk, while allowing most useful markup. 

(It needs some refinement: parsing the attributes accurately and
allowing only whitelisted ones. Little by little I will improve things
...) 

Here is a mailing list in action:
http://www.kylheku.com/lurker/list/ada-mp1.en.html 

On 03.10.2013 11:49, Kaz Kylheku wrote: 

> Hi Wesley, 
> 
> Thanks for taking the time to follow up to all my postings. 
> 
> I see what is going on in the code with regard to HTML; basically it is gutted! 
> 
> Doing this properly requires a filter which strips out dangerous tags, while keeping the safe subset of the markup. 
> 
> I am experimenting with a patch which just sticks in the raw HTML. Later I will add some filtering on it, and also treatment of cid: URL's for proper display of inline images. 
> 
> What I have so far is this: 
> 
> * I made the code which handles multipart/alternative messages to prefer the HTML part, rather than the plain part.
> * HTML is not stripped at all, or subject to any special handling. Instead, the raw UTF-8 is wrapped in an XML CDATA block.
> * In the UI XSL code, I put in a template rule that a mime body part matching the "text/html" content type is copied, but with escaping disabled.
> 
> This mostly works the way I want, modulo safety, and handling of links that point to attachments. 
> 
> I may implement the HTML filtering via an external program that will be configurable in the lurker.conf. 
> 
> On 02.10.2013 06:47, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote: 
> The reason lurker prefers the plain text is that the formatting is more likely to be correct. For security reasons, lurker strips all html tags from the html formatted mail. I don't want lurker to show embedded javascript or links or what-have-you to a user. So, I think the current default is the best option for most people. 
> 
> On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 4:54 AM, Kaz Kylheku <ka...@ky...> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I started using Lurker and right away noticed that when an e-mail is
> archived which is written in HTML, but for which the mail client also
> rendered a plain-text version, Lurker renders the plain text by default.
> You have to click on a link on the far right to view the HTML, which
> looks fine.
> 
> Can we change the default, so that if both are available in the body,
> Lurker will prefer the HTML?
> 
> The plain text versions can be ugly, and displaying them in a web
> archive defeats the point in an archiver which can deal with HTML and
> MIME!
> 
> For example, my mail client renders links as footnotes. These then
> appear in the Lurker archive, instead of the straightforward HTML with
> its anchor elements.
 

Re: [Lurker-users] How to prefer HTML if a message has both plain and HTML?

[Kaz K. <ka...@ky...>]

 

Hi Wesley, 

Thanks for taking the time to follow up to all my postings. 

I see what is going on in the code with regard to HTML; basically it is
gutted! 

Doing this properly requires a filter which strips out dangerous tags,
while keeping the safe subset of the markup. 

I am experimenting with a patch which just sticks in the raw HTML. Later
I will add some filtering on it, and also treatment of cid: URL's for
proper display of inline images. 

What I have so far is this: 

 	* I made the code which handles multipart/alternative messages to
prefer the HTML part, rather than the plain part.
 	* HTML is not stripped at all, or subject to any special handling.
Instead, the raw UTF-8 is wrapped in an XML CDATA block.
 	* In the UI XSL code, I put in a template rule that a mime body part
matching the "text/html" content type is copied, but with escaping
disabled.

This mostly works the way I want, modulo safety, and handling of links
that point to attachments. 

I may implement the HTML filtering via an external program that will be
configurable in the lurker.conf. 

On 02.10.2013 06:47, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote: 

> The reason lurker prefers the plain text is that the formatting is more likely to be correct. For security reasons, lurker strips all html tags from the html formatted mail. I don't want lurker to show embedded javascript or links or what-have-you to a user. So, I think the current default is the best option for most people. 
> 
> On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 4:54 AM, Kaz Kylheku <ka...@ky...> wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I started using Lurker and right away noticed that when an e-mail is
>> archived which is written in HTML, but for which the mail client also
>> rendered a plain-text version, Lurker renders the plain text by default.
>> You have to click on a link on the far right to view the HTML, which
>> looks fine.
>> 
>> Can we change the default, so that if both are available in the body,
>> Lurker will prefer the HTML?
>> 
>> The plain text versions can be ugly, and displaying them in a web
>> archive defeats the point in an archiver which can deal with HTML and
>> MIME!
>> 
>> For example, my mail client renders links as footnotes. These then
>> appear in the Lurker archive, instead of the straightforward HTML with
>> its anchor elements.

 

Re: [Lurker-users] Problem in lurker-prune: utime used to touch file not owned by caller.

[Wesley W. T. <we...@te...>]

On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 11:12 PM, Kaz Kylheku <ka...@ky...> wrote:

> On 29.09.2013 14:06, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> > This code is hostile to installations which use two user accounts for
> > the archiving operation.
>
> By the way, I realize that a workaround is to simply run this operation
> as the web-side user, like "www-data".  The web data document root
> should only ever be written by this user, and never by the mailing
> list user account like "list".
>

That's not a workaround, that's the intended use of lurker.
lurker-index creates the database.
lurker-prune and lurker.cgi  maintain the web cache.
lurker.docroot is part of the web cache.

The only cross-user script is the web-based delete function.
That already needs a password to switch accounts.

Re: [Lurker-users] Origin of render/mailto.cpp

[Wesley W. T. <we...@te...>]

On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Kaz Kylheku <ka...@ky...> wrote:

> The mailto.cpp source file looks like it contains machine-generated
> code. What compiler was used to generate that, and where are the inputs to
> it
> and generation steps?
>

http://sourceforge.net/p/lurker/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/reg2c/

[Lurker-users] Origin of render/mailto.cpp

[Kaz K. <ka...@ky...>]

Hi,

The mailto.cpp source file looks like it contains machine-generated 
code.

What compiler was used to generate that, and where are the inputs to it 
and generation steps?

Thanks.

Re: [Lurker-users] Problem in lurker-prune: utime used to touch file not owned by caller.

[Kaz K. <ka...@ky...>]

On 29.09.2013 14:06, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> There is this code in prune.cpp:
> 
>         // set the mtime stamp to beginfix
>         struct utimbuf touch;
>         touch.actime = touch.modtime = beginfix;
>         if (utime("lurker.docroot", &touch) < 0)
>         {
>                 cerr << "touching " << docfile << ": " <<
> strerror(errno) << endl;
>                 return 1;
>         }
> 
> This code is hostile to installations which use two user accounts for
> the archiving operation.

By the way, I realize that a workaround is to simply run this operation
as the web-side user, like "www-data".  The web data document root
should only ever be written by this user, and never by the mailing
list user account like "list".

Still, it violates the idea that the lurker-* commands should be
runnable in either account in a dual-account setup.

If I happen to be "su"-ed to user "list", I will get an error from the
above code if I run "lurker-prune", though of course in my cron
job, I can have it run as user "www-data".

[Lurker-users] Problem in lurker-prune: utime used to touch file not owned by caller.

[Kaz K. <ka...@ky...>]

Hi all,

There is this code in prune.cpp:

         // set the mtime stamp to beginfix
         struct utimbuf touch;
         touch.actime = touch.modtime = beginfix;
         if (utime("lurker.docroot", &touch) < 0)
         {
                 cerr << "touching " << docfile << ": " << 
strerror(errno) << endl;
                 return 1;
         }

This code is hostile to installations which use two user accounts for 
the archiving operation.

The problem is that if utime is called with a non-null times pointer, 
then the caller must be the owner of the file. Being the member of a 
group which owns the file is not good enough.

An alternative would be not to rely on the modification timestamp of 
"lurker.docroot", but actually store the value of beginfix in the file, 
either as a decimal integer or binary image or whatever.

[Lurker-users] How to prefer HTML if a message has both plain and HTML?

[Kaz K. <ka...@ky...>]

Hi all,

I started using Lurker and right away noticed that when an e-mail is
archived which is written in HTML, but for which the mail client also
rendered a plain-text version, Lurker renders the plain text by default.
You have to click on a link on the far right to view the HTML, which
looks fine.

Can we change the default, so that if both are available in the body,
Lurker will prefer the HTML?

The plain text versions can be ugly, and displaying them in a web
archive defeats the point in an archiver which can deal with HTML and
MIME!

For example, my mail client renders links as footnotes.  These then
appear in the Lurker archive, instead of the straightforward HTML with
its anchor elements.

[Lurker-users] MD5 patch

[Kevin R. <swe...@te...>]

I've found a minor bug in the MD5Final function. At the end of
processing, it clears the MD5 context by zeroing its memory. In the
existing code, it's zeroing sizeof(ctx) bytes (ie, the size of the ctx
pointer), rather than sizeof(*ctx) bytes (ie, the size of the ctx struct
itself).

Attached is a patch against the latest revision in Subversion.

Re: [Lurker-users] Responsive UI for Lurker

[Jonas M. <jo...@fr...>]

Hello David,

Am 26.06.2013 22:45, schrieb mark david mcCreary:
> I'm in the process of modifying the Lurker look to work better on small screens.
> 
> I've attached my modifications in case anybody else wants to use them.
> 
> You can see the new look at http://dynomite.internet-tools.com/cns-listserv
> 
> That is a test machine and I will leave that up for a few more days.
> 
> I'm open to suggestions, comments, and better ways to do this.  If I get any feedback, I'll post a revised set of changes then.

Great to hear. I'm not actively using lurker at the moment, but I do
think that others could benefit from your UI improvements as well.

May I suggest that you release your UI modifications somewhere
publically available? Maybe you can even release it as alternative UI
theme for lurker? I would be happy to add your theme to the Debian
lurker package.

Kind regards,
 jonas

[Lurker-users] Responsive UI for Lurker

[mark d. m. <md...@in...>]

I'm in the process of modifying the Lurker look to work better on small screens.

I've attached my modifications in case anybody else wants to use them.

You can see the new look at http://dynomite.internet-tools.com/cns-listserv

That is a test machine and I will leave that up for a few more days.

I'm open to suggestions, comments, and better ways to do this.  If I get any feedback, I'll post a revised set of changes then.

Thanks

mark david mcCreary
md...@in...

p.s.  The attachment size is causing problems with posting this message to the mailing list.  So if you are interested in the changes, please send email to md...@in...

-- 
mark david mcCreary
Internet Tools, Inc.

1302 Waugh Dr. #438
Houston, Texas 77019

md...@in...
713-520-4500

Re: [Lurker-users] How are the filenames created for displayed messages ?

[Wesley W. T. <we...@te...>]

On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 4:01 PM, mark david mcCreary <md...@in...
> wrote:

> /var/www/cns-listserv/cns-listserv/message/20121217.183341.1bbc9bfe.en.html
>
> 20121217 should be the date, and 183341 is probably the timestamp.  But
> what about 1bbc9bfe ?
> It looks like a CRC32 checksum, but I can not reproduce it from the
> message.
>

It's a compressed MD5 of the message-id if available, otherwise the author
address, otherwise random.

See:
http://lurker.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/lurker/trunk/lurker/index/Index.cpp?revision=1649&view=markup
... functions Index::index_id and build_message_hash

[Lurker-users] How are the filenames created for displayed messages ?

[mark d. m. <md...@in...>]

I'm trying to make an extension to Lurker, an alternative interface to the messages.

I see this file name

/var/www/cns-listserv/cns-listserv/message/20121217.183341.1bbc9bfe.en.html

20121217 should be the date, and 183341 is probably the timestamp.  But what about 1bbc9bfe ?

It looks like a CRC32 checksum, but I can not reproduce it from the message.

Can anybody point me in the right direction on this.

Thank you.

mark


-- 
mark david mcCreary
mail-list.com

1302 Waugh Dr. #438
Houston, Texas 77019

md...@ma...
713-520-4500

Re: [Lurker-users] Lurker on Ubuntu Oneiric (11.10)

[mark d. m. <md...@ma...>]

> 
> 
> I'm going to start learning a bit more about Lurker and see if I can understand the problem.



Well, the problem seems obvious enough when I look at the Apache error log.

warning: failed to load external entity "../ui/mindex.xsl"
error
xsltParseStylesheetFile : cannot parse ../ui/mindex.xsl
compilation error: file - line 3 element mindex
xsltParseStylesheetProcess : document is not a stylesheet



I've neglected to populate the ui file with various important files.

ls /etc/lurker/ui
ca.xml  common.js  common.xsl  da.xml  default.css  de.xml  el.xml  en.xml  es.xml  fi.xml  fr.xml  gl.xml  hu.xml  it.xml  ja.xml  lang.xml  lang.xsl  list.xsl  message.xsl  mindex.xsl  nl.xml  pl.xml  pt-BR.xml  pt.xml  search.xsl  splash.xsl  thread.xsl

In my case, I've got a secondary ui directory for a different look, and missed a step in my rebuilding process.

Fixed that problem and things seem to be working.

Not at all sure why the problem seemed intermittent, but I'm very happy to found the solution.

Sorry to bother you all.

mark

[Lurker-users] Lurker on Ubuntu Oneiric (11.10)

[mark d. m. <md...@ma...>]

I thought I was being clever by compiling the latest Debian source code package of Lurker (lurker_2.3-2_i386.deb) on Ubuntu, since there is no package on the latest Ubuntu release.

Everything seemed to be working and I transferred over a bunch of lists from the old machine.  But after a day, when you clicked on the index to see a message, the message came up blank.

This is happening to some, but not all messages.  And messages that appeared last night, now come up blank.

I'm going to start learning a bit more about Lurker and see if I can understand the problem.

In the meantime, if anybody has any insights, I'd love to hear them.

Thanks

mark