From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8562207EC for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:06:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753670AbcITXGU (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 19:06:20 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:45803 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752978AbcITXGU (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 19:06:20 -0400 Received: (qmail 8611 invoked by uid 109); 20 Sep 2016 23:06:19 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:06:19 +0000 Received: (qmail 25839 invoked by uid 111); 20 Sep 2016 23:06:31 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 19:06:31 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 19:06:16 -0400 Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 19:06:16 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Jonathan Tan Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] handle multiline in-body headers Message-ID: <20160920230616.n2jwhavi2dzgflno@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:17:50AM -0700, Jonathan Tan wrote: > Changes since v2: > o Removed utf8 translation before scissors line check in > check_inbody_header (I was thinking of support for encodings like > UTF-16, but I guess those don't work with the current reencode_string > anyway since it uses strlen internally) Yeah, I'd be surprised if UTF-16 works very well with our code in general. If we want to address that, though, the sanest thing is probably to convert it internally to UTF-8 when we remove the transfer encoding in handle_body(). -Peff