Bug 432552

Summary:	Bugzilla::RPC::Bug::getBug() fails to get few IT bugs
Product:	[Community] Bugzilla	Reporter:	Noura El hawary <nelhawar>
Component:	WebService	Assignee:	Simon Green <sgreen>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	3.6	CC:	ebaak, kbaker, mbacovsk, sgreen
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2012-06-19 04:08:52 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Noura El hawary 2008-02-12 19:46:42 UTC

The problem is that xmlrpc function
Bug.getBug() if failing to read some bugzilla bugs that were reported by
issue tracker and you got one of those bugs which is 284681. I have done
a scan on all the bugzillas that were generated by Issue Tracker which
are almost 8800 bugs and basically only 6 bugs out of that large number
are failing getBug() and will fail your script , the bugs are :
162711, 171507, 172740, 179671, 211393, 284681. 

So the problem doesn't seem like a big issue, but there is certainly
something going on, As Dave is suggesting IssueTrackers php xmlrpc lib
is somehow adding the comment in such a way that causes the getBug to
fail as it seems that SOAP::Lite thinks the header in the comment is the
real header instead of just text. We are going to fix the above bugs and
also try to find a solution to prevent this error from happening again.

Comment 1 Martin Bacovsky 2008-09-03 10:15:42 UTC

I'm not sure if this is the same issue, but bug 282611 is affected too. When I try to read it (using python xmlrpclib) I get 'not well-formed (invalid token): line 35, column 0' error.

Comment 2 David Lawrence 2008-09-16 16:55:53 UTC

Red Hat Bugzilla is now using version 3.2 of the Bugzilla codebase and therefore this bug will need to be re-verified against the new release. With the updated code this bug may no longer be relevant or may have been fixed in the new code.
Updating bug version to 3.2.

Comment 3 Martin Bacovsky 2008-09-16 18:01:36 UTC

Issue from comment #1 is present in version 3.2.

Comment 4 David Lawrence 2010-01-15 16:54:41 UTC

Red Hat Bugzilla is now using version 3.4 of the Bugzilla codebase and
therefore this bug will need to be re-verified against the new release. With
the updated code this bug may no longer be relevant or may have been fixed in
the new code. Updating bug version to 3.4.

Comment 5 David Lawrence 2010-08-25 21:42:24 UTC

Red Hat has now upgraded to Bugzilla 3.6 and this bug will now be reassigned to that version. It would be helpful to the Bugzilla Development Team if this bug is verified to still be an issue with the latest version. If it is no longer an issue, then feel free to close, otherwise please comment that it is still a problem and we will try to address the issue as soon as we can.

Thanks
Bugzilla Development Team

Comment 7 Simon Green 2012-06-19 04:08:52 UTC

The not well formed error was fixed in Bugzilla 3.6

  -- simon