Debian Bug report logs - #244845
muttprint: Fail to print due to a uninitialized value

version graph

Package: muttprint; Maintainer for muttprint is Rene Engelhard <[email protected]>; Source for muttprint is src:muttprint (PTS, buildd, popcon).

Reported by: Vincent Fourmond <[email protected]>

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 09:03:04 UTC

Severity: normal

Merged with 390825

Found in versions 0.72-3, muttprint/0.72d-8

Reply or subscribe to this bug.

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to [email protected], Rene Engelhard <[email protected]>:
Bug#244845; Package muttprint. (full text, mbox, link).


Acknowledgement sent to Vincent Fourmond <[email protected]>:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to Rene Engelhard <[email protected]>. (full text, mbox, link).


Message #5 received at [email protected] (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vincent Fourmond <[email protected]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[email protected]>
Subject: muttprint: Fail to print due to a uninitialized value
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 10:47:13 +0200
Package: muttprint
Version: 0.72-3
Severity: normal


  The printing if the mails fails due to a die on line 1730 (logging) obviously due to an 
unitialized variable (the name of the log file). I don't know if it could come from the fact 
that I'm printing from within pine.

  Thanks for considering this report

	Vincent Fourmond


-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.0
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C

Versions of packages muttprint depends on:
ii  debconf [debconf-2.0]         1.4.22     Debian configuration management sy
ii  perl                          5.8.3-3    Larry Wall's Practical Extraction 
ii  tetex-extra                   2.0.2-6    Additional library files of teTeX

-- debconf information excluded



Information forwarded to [email protected], Rene Engelhard <[email protected]>:
Bug#244845; Package muttprint. (full text, mbox, link).


Acknowledgement sent to Bernhard Walle <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Rene Engelhard <[email protected]>. (full text, mbox, link).


Message #10 received at [email protected] (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Bernhard Walle <[email protected]>
To: Vincent Fourmond <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Bug#244845: muttprint: Fail to print due to a uninitialized value
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 21:22:47 +0200
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hello,

* Vincent Fourmond <[email protected]> [2004-04-20 10:47]:
> 
> 
>   The printing if the mails fails due to a die on line 1730 (logging) obviously due to an 
> unitialized variable (the name of the log file). I don't know if it could come from the fact 
> that I'm printing from within pine.
> 
>   Thanks for considering this report

try following: 

Create a file "test.mail":

,----[ test.mail ]-
| From test
| From: Test <[email protected]>
| To: Test2 <[email protected]>
| Subject: Subject
| 
| Test
| 
`----

Try 
        
  $ muttprint -f test.mail



Regards,
Bernhard

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to [email protected], Rene Engelhard <[email protected]>:
Bug#244845; Package muttprint. (full text, mbox, link).


Acknowledgement sent to Vincent Fourmond <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Rene Engelhard <[email protected]>. (full text, mbox, link).


Message #15 received at [email protected] (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vincent Fourmond <[email protected]>
To: Bernhard Walle <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Bug#244845: muttprint: Fail to print due to a uninitialized value
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 09:10:09 +0200 (CEST)
  Hello

> >   The printing if the mails fails due to a die on line 1730 (logging) obviously due to an
> > unitialized variable (the name of the log file). I don't know if it could come from the fact
> > that I'm printing from within pine.
> >


  The funny thing is that it actually does work today, after the second
reinstall (because as I needed to print something yesterday, I downgraded
back to 0.71 - and I switched back today to 0.72). Could this be a
packaging-related problem ?

  The line that was incriminated was line 1730:

open (LFILE, ">>$Temp{logf}") or die "Could not open $Temp{logf}";

  And the reason was that $Temp{logf} was empty (message was "Could not
open "). Now I don't understand why today it's working back again. To be
truthfull, as $Temp{logf} seems to be properly initialized, I'm really
puzzled.

  Well, no trouble, if you ever find something one day about this, let me
know, if you don't, that doesn't really matter, since now I can use it
again. By the way, let me thank you, I find this muttprint really great !

	Vincent Fourmond




Merged 244845 390825. Request was from Rene Engelhard <[email protected]> to [email protected]. (full text, mbox, link).


Send a report that this bug log contains spam.


Debian bug tracking system administrator <[email protected]>. Last modified: Thu May 15 15:56:54 2025; Machine Name: bembo

Debian Bug tracking system

Debbugs is free software and licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2. The current version can be obtained from https://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/.

Copyright © 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson, 2005-2017 Don Armstrong, and many other contributors.