James
2018-Sep-27 09:42 UTC
v2.3.3 rc1 - Error: sieve: !!BUG!!: Binary compiled from dovecot.sieve is still corrupt
On 25/09/2018 22:39, Stephan Bosch wrote:> Something mightily weird is going on at your end. It doesn't fail here > (see below). First of all, what is your configuration (output from > `dovecot -n`)?You have dovecot.conf but... $ dovecot -c dovecot.conf -n # 2.3.3.rc1 (14e4920d8): dovecot.conf # Pigeonhole version 0.5.2 (7704de5e) # OS: SunOS 5.11 i86pc # Hostname: mailhost doveconf: Warning: please set ssl_dh=</etc/opt/xxx/dovecot/dh.pem doveconf: Warning: You can generate it with: dd if=/var/opt/xxx/lib/dovecot/ssl-parameters.dat bs=1 skip=88 | openssl dhparam -inform der > /etc/opt/xxx/dovecot/dh.pem mail_debug = yes mail_gid = staff mail_location = maildir:/path/to/%d/%n/Maildir mail_uid = james managesieve_notify_capability = mailto managesieve_sieve_capability = fileinto reject envelope encoded-character vacation subaddress comparator-i;ascii-numeric relational regex imap4flags copy include variables body enotify environment mailbox date index ihave duplicate mime foreverypart extracttext postmaster_address = postmaster at domain.tld ssl_dh = # hidden, use -P to show it> Also, can you make a hex dump of the binary (using `sieve-dump -h > <your-script-binary>.svbin`).As said the svbin is identical to the one create by the previous version. Comparing the dump: Block 0 differs because it has the source file name. Block 1 is identical Block 2 is identical. It is this block that is declared corrupt.> Finally, can you try to explicitly delete the binary (preferably after > preserving it elsewhere) so that it is guaranteed to be created fresh?I did each time.> ## Success at my end:Spot the difference...> Address Line Code > 00000000: DEBUG BLOCK: 3 > 00000001: EXTENSIONS [1]: > 00000002: vacation > 00000004: 3: VACATION > 00000007: 5: seconds: NUM 86400Address Line Code 00000000: DEBUG BLOCK: 3 00000001: EXTENSIONS [1]: 00000002: vacation 00000004: 2: VACATION 00000007: 4: seconds: NUM 5 00000009: Binary is corrupt. The line numbers differs and 86400 is read as 5. It is like it has forgotten the size of an integer or is confused about endianness. There is something strange, like an #if that guesses wrong. At least I have somewhere to start looking. Thank you for checking at your end, I was worried the RC had introduced an error and your result suggests not. RCs are for testing and I am.
Stephan Bosch
2018-Sep-27 12:40 UTC
v2.3.3 rc1 - Error: sieve: !!BUG!!: Binary compiled from dovecot.sieve is still corrupt
Op 27-9-2018 om 11:42 schreef James:> On 25/09/2018 22:39, Stephan Bosch wrote: > >> Something mightily weird is going on at your end. It doesn't fail here >> (see below). First of all, what is your configuration (output from >> `dovecot -n`)? > > You have dovecot.conf but... > > $ dovecot -c dovecot.conf -n > # 2.3.3.rc1 (14e4920d8): dovecot.conf > # Pigeonhole version 0.5.2 (7704de5e) > # OS: SunOS 5.11 i86pc > # Hostname: mailhost > doveconf: Warning: please set ssl_dh=</etc/opt/xxx/dovecot/dh.pem > doveconf: Warning: You can generate it with: dd > if=/var/opt/xxx/lib/dovecot/ssl-parameters.dat bs=1 skip=88 | openssl > dhparam -inform der > /etc/opt/xxx/dovecot/dh.pem > mail_debug = yes > mail_gid = staff > mail_location = maildir:/path/to/%d/%n/Maildir > mail_uid = james > managesieve_notify_capability = mailto > managesieve_sieve_capability = fileinto reject envelope > encoded-character vacation subaddress comparator-i;ascii-numeric > relational regex imap4flags copy include variables body enotify > environment mailbox date index ihave duplicate mime foreverypart > extracttext > postmaster_address = postmaster at domain.tld > ssl_dh = # hidden, use -P to show it > > > >> Also, can you make a hex dump of the binary (using `sieve-dump -h >> <your-script-binary>.svbin`). > > As said the svbin is identical to the one create by the previous version. > > Comparing the dump: > Block 0 differs because it has the source file name. > Block 1 is identical > Block 2 is identical. It is this block that is declared corrupt. > > > >> Finally, can you try to explicitly delete the binary (preferably after >> preserving it elsewhere) so that it is guaranteed to be created fresh? > > I did each time. > > > >> ## Success at my end: > > Spot the difference... > >> Address?? Line? Code >> 00000000:?????? DEBUG BLOCK: 3 >> 00000001:?????? EXTENSIONS [1]: >> 00000002:???????? vacation >> 00000004:??? 3: VACATION >> 00000007:??? 5:?? seconds: NUM 86400 > > Address?? Line? Code > 00000000:?????? DEBUG BLOCK: 3 > 00000001:?????? EXTENSIONS [1]: > 00000002:???????? vacation > 00000004:??? 2: VACATION > 00000007:??? 4:?? seconds: NUM 5 > 00000009:???????? Binary is corrupt. > > The line numbers differs and 86400 is read as 5.? It is like it has > forgotten the size of an integer or is confused about endianness.? > There is something strange, like an #if that guesses wrong.? At least > I have somewhere to start looking. > > Thank you for checking at your end, I was worried the RC had > introduced an error and your result suggests not.? RCs are for testing > and I am.The number is stored as a chain of bytes of which the most significant bit indicates whether the next byte still belongs to the number. If this bit is somehow interpreted wrong, the first byte of this number would read as 5, thereby returning '5' as the result and ignoring subsequent bytes (causing corruption at the next item to read). Since you're using SunOS, your compiler may be doing something funky. Which compiler is used anyway? Perhaps different versions for the Dovecot releases that do and don't work? Does it help when you change the "> 0" at the following code position to "!= 0" ? https://github.com/dovecot/pigeonhole/blob/master/src/lib-sieve/sieve-binary-code.c#L300 Regards, Stephan.
James
2018-Sep-27 13:53 UTC
v2.3.3 rc1 - Error: sieve: !!BUG!!: Binary compiled from dovecot.sieve is still corrupt
On 27/09/2018 13:40, Stephan Bosch wrote:>> Address Line Code >> 00000000: DEBUG BLOCK: 3 >> 00000001: EXTENSIONS [1]: >> 00000002: vacation >> 00000004: 2: VACATION >> 00000007: 4: seconds: NUM 5 >> 00000009: Binary is corrupt. >> >> The line numbers differs and 86400 is read as 5. It is like it has >> forgotten the size of an integer or is confused about endianness. >> There is something strange, like an #if that guesses wrong. At least >> I have somewhere to start looking. >> >> Thank you for checking at your end, I was worried the RC had >> introduced an error and your result suggests not. RCs are for testing >> and I am. > > The number is stored as a chain of bytes of which the most significant > bit indicates whether the next byte still belongs to the number. If this > bit is somehow interpreted wrong, the first byte of this number would > read as 5, thereby returning '5' as the result and ignoring subsequent > bytes (causing corruption at the next item to read). > > Since you're using SunOS, your compiler may be doing something funky. > Which compiler is used anyway? Perhaps different versions for the > Dovecot releases that do and don't work?It was studio cc. gcc doesn't make it through configure and I didn't ask why. I have some other things to do but will look at this again later. Thank you for the byte code explanations. The coding at this point is hard to follow with the pointers-to-functions and #defines. James.
Josef 'Jeff' Sipek
2018-Sep-27 13:55 UTC
v2.3.3 rc1 - Error: sieve: !!BUG!!: Binary compiled from dovecot.sieve is still corrupt
On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:42:16 +0100, James wrote:> On 25/09/2018 22:39, Stephan Bosch wrote: > > > Something mightily weird is going on at your end. It doesn't fail here > > (see below). First of all, what is your configuration (output from > > `dovecot -n`)? > > You have dovecot.conf but... > > $ dovecot -c dovecot.conf -n > # 2.3.3.rc1 (14e4920d8): dovecot.conf > # Pigeonhole version 0.5.2 (7704de5e) > # OS: SunOS 5.11 i86pcOut of curiosity, is this a Solaris system or an illumos system? Jeff. -- I'm somewhere between geek and normal. - Linus Torvalds
James
2018-Sep-28 08:53 UTC
v2.3.3 rc1 - Error: sieve: !!BUG!!: Binary compiled from dovecot.sieve is still corrupt
On 27/09/2018 14:55, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:42:16 +0100, James wrote: >> $ dovecot -c dovecot.conf -n >> # 2.3.3.rc1 (14e4920d8): dovecot.conf >> # Pigeonhole version 0.5.2 (7704de5e) >> # OS: SunOS 5.11 i86pc > > Out of curiosity, is this a Solaris system or an illumos system?Not Illumos. Test builds on 10 and 11.3 - RC exercise, I'll add Sparc when my machine is powered on. Tested run on Solaris 10 and 11.3 - RC exercise. Reports from 11.3, results so far the same either way. Packages built on Solaris 10 as LCD unless there is good reason to have a package per rev.
Reasonably Related Threads
- v2.3.3 rc1 - Error: sieve: !!BUG!!: Binary compiled from dovecot.sieve is still corrupt
- v2.3.3 rc1 - Error: sieve: !!BUG!!: Binary compiled from dovecot.sieve is still corrupt
- v2.3.3 rc1 - Error: sieve: !!BUG!!: Binary compiled from dovecot.sieve is still corrupt
- v2.3.3 rc1 - Error: sieve: !!BUG!!: Binary compiled from dovecot.sieve is still corrupt
- v2.3.3 rc1 - Error: sieve: !!BUG!!: Binary compiled from dovecot.sieve is still corrupt