Re: [Evolution] Null "Received time" filter condition

[Lindsay Haisley <fmouse fmp com>]

On Thu, 2017-10-05 at 10:09 +0200, Milan Crha wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-10-04 at 12:27 -0500, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> > Attached.
>       Hi,
> thanks. I imported it. I also edited it and removed all Received
> headers and imported it again. Thus I have two similar messages now.
> I
> applied the filters on each of them with Ctrl+Y and I cannot confirm
> your behaviour. The message with Received header (your original from
> the attachment) did not hit the filter, while my edited message (no
> Received header in it) did hit the filter.
>
> My filter is very simple:
>
>    Find items which match: [ all the following conditions ]
>      [ Specific header ] [ Received ] [ does not exist ] [     ]

Hmmm...  This is the ONLY condition I have set in trying to exhibit the
issue here - exactly this and nothing else, but see below :)

>    Then
>      [ Set Label ] [ Important ]

Aha!! It looks as if you're setting this up using an explicit message
filter. What I'm doing, from the tool-bar, is Search -> Advanced Search
-> Add Condition -> Specific header, and then setting the "Received
does not exist" condition as above and observing what shows up in the
message index. It's under these conditions that I get the spurious hits
on messages with null bodies, which show up in the index. Try it this
way and see if you can duplicate my observation. Just FYI and FWIW, I'm
running Evolution 3.18.5.2 on two different desktop systems and can
observe this behavior on both.

What I'm doing is isolating messages with no Received headers
_temporarily_ so that they can be highlighted and moved to another
folder. Doing a "Search" as opposed to creating a "Filter" is
preferable for this. As I've noted, this bug is more of an anomaly than
a problem. Since I customarily sort mail in the Evo index on received
date, all the incorrectly identified emails with Received headers and
null bodies sort to the top of the index. In a back-handed way this is
actually kind of convenient since messages with null bodies are mostly
trash and I can look at them and then send them off to the cosmic bit
bucket. 

> The 'Then' part doesn't matter. I guess, maybe, do you have multiple
> conditions set and the "Find items which match" says "any of the
> following conditions", instead of "all"? Eventually could any other
> filter be used, as maybe your "Then" part doesn't contain "Stop
> processing" (supposing no rule above this one had been applied)?

I'm not using any explicit message filters, but it looks as if we may
be slightly comparing apples and oranges here, as noted above.

BTW, sorry about the duplicate (delayed) post on this thread from me.
Evolution slipped me a curve-ball and posted over "fmouse-
courier fmp com", an address I use for the Courier-MTA list. The
message went to the moderator several days ago, who approved it this
morning, although I'd already re-posted it over my subscribed address.

-- 
Lindsay Haisley       | "The only unchanging certainty
FMP Computer Services |    is the certainty of change"
512-259-1190          |
http://www.fmp.com    | - Ancient wisdom, all cultures