Bug#169678: "Print file was not accepted (client-error-bad-request)!"

To: Bastien ROUCARIES <roucaries.bastien@gmail.com>
Cc: 169678@bugs.debian.org, oli <orkoch@tirnet.de>
Subject: Bug#169678: "Print file was not accepted (client-error-bad-request)!"
From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 12:04:04 -0600
Message-id: <20110204180404.GA2085@elie>
Reply-to: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>, 169678@bugs.debian.org
In-reply-to: <201102041843.16183.roucaries.bastien@gmail.com>
References: <201102041843.16183.roucaries.bastien@gmail.com>

tags 169678 - unreproducible
quit

Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:

> tags 169678 + unreproducible
> tags 169678 +  moreinfo
> thanks
>
> Please supply some information. feel free to close

It is amazing to see the bug list being separated between confirmed
and unconfirmed --- thanks very much for this.

My wild guess is that this is a (past or present) foomatic bug that
caused it to call ghostscript without specifying a driver (so it
defaulted to x11) in some circumstance.  At any rate, the reporter
didn't say what foomatic version was in use and whether it was an
intermittent problem --- so we do not even have enough information to
say if it is reproducible. :/

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Processed: Re: "Print file was not accepted (client-error-bad-request)!"
  - From: owner@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System)

References:
- Bug#169678: [gs]
  - From: Bastien ROUCARIES <roucaries.bastien@gmail.com>

Prev by Date: Bug#169678: [gs]
Next by Date: Processed: Re: "Print file was not accepted (client-error-bad-request)!"
Previous by thread: Processed: [gs]
Next by thread: Processed: Re: "Print file was not accepted (client-error-bad-request)!"
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread