Bug#33384: marked as done (ispell: new -x problem)
Your message dated Sun, 14 Mar 1999 22:24:22 +0000
with message-id <19990314222421.A17872@tardis.ed.ac.uk>
and subject line Fixed in ispell 3.1.20-0.6
has caused the attached bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I'm
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Ian Jackson
(administrator, Debian bugs database)
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 14 Feb 1999 20:39:31 +0000
Received: (qmail 6352 invoked from network); 14 Feb 1999 20:39:31 -0000
Received: from rn082110.mrs.umn.edu (146.57.82.110)
by master.debian.org with SMTP; 14 Feb 1999 20:39:31 -0000
Received: from dan by rn082110.mrs.umn.edu with local (Exim 2.11 #1 (Debian))
id 10C8KA-0006hm-00; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 14:39:30 -0600
From: <dan@rn082110.mrs.umn.edu>
Subject: ispell: new -x problem
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Mailer: bug 3.1.7
Message-Id: <E10C8KA-0006hm-00@rn082110.mrs.umn.edu>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 14:39:30 -0600
Package: ispell
Version: 3.1.20-0.5
The -x option to ispell which is supposed to make it not write a backup file
now causes it to exit, displaying a usage message.
I first noticed this in mutt, which calls ispell with the -x option. Further
investigation shows this:
$ ispell file.txt
(works normally)
$ ispell -x file.txt
Usage: ispell [-dfile | -pfile | -wchars | -Wn | -t | -n | -x | -b | -S | -B | -C | -P | -m | -Lcontext | -M | -N | -Ttype | -V] file .....
It's possible this was broken when fixing earlier problems with the -x option.
-- System Information
Debian Release: 2.1
Kernel Version: Linux rn082110 2.2.1 #1 Fri Jan 29 20:13:54 CST 1999 i686 unknown
Versions of the packages ispell depends on:
ii libc6 2.0.7.19981211 GNU C Library: shared libraries
ii libncurses4 4.2-3 Shared libraries for terminal handling
Reply to: