Bug#175239: efax no longer understands dvi2fax' output
On 07.04.04 Frank Küster (frank@debian.org) wrote:
> Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de> wrote:
Hi,
> > drachi:[~/efax] #./dvi2fax.new truc.dvi
> > This is dvips(k) 5.86e Copyright 2001 Radical Eye Software (www.radicaleye.com)
> > ' TeX output 2004.04.07:1246' ->
> > <texc.pro>. [1]
> [...]
> > drachi:[~/efax] #file truc-001.fax
> > truc-001.fax: group 3 fax data, fine resolution (204x196 DPI)
> >
> > drachi:[~/efax] #./dvi2fax.old truc.dvi
> > This is dvips(k) 5.86e Copyright 2001 Radical Eye Software (www.radicaleye.com)
> > ' TeX output 2004.04.07:1246' ->
> > <texc.pro>. [1]
> > drachi:[~/efax] #file truc-001.fax
> > truc-001.fax: raw G3 data
>
> That is the same as I got - therefore the (possibly different) gs
> versions produce the same output, or at least output which looks the
> same to magic(5).
>
drachi:[~/efax] #./dvi2fax.old truc.dvi
This is dvips(k) 5.86e Copyright 2001 Radical Eye Software (www.radicaleye.com)
' TeX output 2004.04.07:1246' ->
<texc.pro>. [1]
drachi:[~/efax] #mv truc-001.fax truc-old.fax
drachi:[~/efax] #./dvi2fax.new truc.dvi
This is dvips(k) 5.86e Copyright 2001 Radical Eye Software (www.radicaleye.com)
' TeX output 2004.04.07:1246' ->
<texc.pro>. [1]
drachi:[~/efax] #mv truc-001.fax truc-new.fax
drachi:[~/efax] #diff truc-new.fax /home/hille/tmp/sarge/efax/file-new.fax
Binary files truc-new.fax and /home/hille/tmp/sarge/efax/file-new.fax differ
drachi:[~/efax] #diff truc-old.fax /home/hille/tmp/sarge/efax/file-old.fax
Binary files truc-old.fax and /home/hille/tmp/sarge/efax/file-old.fax differ
drachi:[~/efax] #./efax /home/hille/tmp/sarge/efax/file-new.fax -t 0123456789
./efax: Thu Apr 8 00:36:09 2004 efax v 0.9a-001114 Copyright 1999 Ed Casas
./efax: Thu Apr 8 00:36:09 2004 efax v 0.9a-001114 Copyright 1999 Ed Casas
efax: 36:09 compiled Apr 6 2004 19:31:38
efax: 36:09 opened /dev/modem
efax: 36:10 using Version 1.10 / 19.07.1999 "ELSA AG, Aachen (Germany)" "MicroLink 56k basic" "Version 1.10 / 19.07.1999" in class 2.0
efax: 36:13 Error: terminating on signal 2
efax: 36:13 done, returning 5 (terminated by signal)
and then he starts dialing. don't tell me, that the difference
between your one and my ony was only a timestamp....
drachi:[~/efax] #diff -a truc-new.fax /home/hille/tmp/sarge/efax/file-new.fax |wc
11 100 19497
BTW:
drachi:[~/efax] #./efax -t 0123456789 truc-new.fax
./efax: Thu Apr 8 00:40:52 2004 efax v 0.9a-001114 Copyright 1999 Ed Casas
./efax: Thu Apr 8 00:40:52 2004 efax v 0.9a-001114 Copyright 1999 Ed Casas
efax: 40:52 compiled Apr 6 2004 19:31:38
efax: 40:52 Error: can't get format of truc-new.fax
efax: 40:52 done, returning 2 (unrecoverable error)
drachi:[~/efax] #./efax truc-new.fax -t 0123456789
./efax: Thu Apr 8 00:41:39 2004 efax v 0.9a-001114 Copyright 1999 Ed Casas
./efax: Thu Apr 8 00:41:39 2004 efax v 0.9a-001114 Copyright 1999 Ed Casas
efax: 41:39 compiled Apr 6 2004 19:31:38
efax: 41:39 opened /dev/modem
efax: 41:40 using Version 1.10 / 19.07.1999 "ELSA AG, Aachen (Germany)" "MicroLink 56k basic" "Version 1.10 / 19.07.1999" in class 2.0
efax: 41:43 Error: terminating on signal 2
efax: 41:44 done, returning 5 (terminated by signal)
Have no clue, that does that mean.
> > An strace of efax shows me, that the error message "can't get format
> > of truc-001.fax" appears before even opening /dev/modem.
>
> Really? That's different here, both on woody-bunk2 and in the sarge
> chroot, both with efax v 0.9a-001114.
>
drachi:[~/efax] #strace ./efax -t 0123456789 truc-new.fax 2>&1 | grep modem
drachi:[~/efax] #strace ./efax -t 0123456789 truc-new.fax 2>&1 | grep format
write(2, "efax: 43:43 Error: can\'t get for"..., 52efax: 43:43 Error:
can't get format of truc-new.fax
> > Last resort: That was a bug in ghostscript, which has been fixed in
> > unstable. Would you be so kind to send me your *.fax file?
>
> I can't see any difference between the files produced on woody+ and
> on sarge, but I can see the difference between the two dvi2fax
> versions - what am I missing?
>
The both dvi2fax versions of woody and sarge don't really differ.
Between potato and woody I see, that the resolution is not fixed to
204x196. What does mean woody+ ?
> > The number was real, he really started sending that fax. So I guess,
> > that is a bug in efax....
>
> Well, perhaps not a bug - I'd say an incompatibility. Does sendfax
> understand the version that efax likes?
>
At least he didn't complain about unknown formats. I didn't try to
send that fax anywhere and call the receiver, whether it has arrived.
H.
--
sigmentation fault
Reply to: