search

laoluoyebamiji / anti-phishing-email-reply

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/anti-phishing-email-reply
0 stars 1 forks source link

using ./add-address-to-list.pl to add an existing address with multiple types behaves differently than with a single type #6

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago 
What steps will reproduce the problem?

$ ./add-address-to-list.pl notice@webmailsupports.net
specify type: AB
specify date: 20110713

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?

EXPECTED:
$ svn diff
No change.  Address already existed with identical types and with a newer date.

OBSERVED:
notice the duplicated type flags created by the perl script.
$ svn diff
Index: phishing_reply_addresses
===================================================================
--- phishing_reply_addresses    (revision 4832)
+++ phishing_reply_addresses    (working copy)
@@ -12746,7 +12746,7 @@
 notice@onlinebanking1.wachovia.com,A,20100404
 notice@onlinebanking2.wachovia.com,A,20100404
 notice@webmail.nl,E,20100812
-notice@webmailsupports.net,AB,20110714
+notice@webmailsupports.net,AABB,20110714
 notice@webmaster.com,A,20081210
 notice@webmaster.org,E,20101205
 notice_3@mail2webmaster.com,A,20090109

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?

Ubuntu linux.
$ svn up
At revision 4832.

Please provide any additional information below.

Here is observed behaviour for similar case with a single type:

$ ./add-address-to-list.pl notice@webmail.nl
specify type: E
specify date: 20100811
$ svn diff 
$

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcap...@gmail.com on 14 Jul 2011 at 2:05