[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debugging pine sessions

On Thu, 14 Aug 1997, Anthony Fok wrote:

> On Thu, 7 Aug 1997, Santiago Vila Doncel wrote:
> > > I could see your point about -DDEBUG not being appropriate for a
> > > production program if the resultant output was only useful for debugging
> > > Pine. However, the principal use of this information is for debugging
> > > pine /sessions/ (and the default debug level can be set accordingly).
> > 
> > Again, there must be very few people interested on this.
> I disagree.  The debug feature is a standard Pine behaviour.  I was very
> surprised disappointed when I discovered that I couldn't use the debug
> option at all (I was having some problem with Pine and the SMTP server
> (exim), and I would like to check the .pine-debug? files to see what was
> going on.)
> Therefore, I think the -DDEBUG flag should be turned on by default.  If
> some user is annoyed with the .pine-debug? files, they can always use the
> -d 0 option.  At least, let the user make the decision instead of
> eliminating the -d option entirely.

Having got my debian pine 3.96 working correctly, the university has 
upgraded their IMAP server from a beta version to a production version. The 
effect is that my client can no longer read the inbox correctly. I get 
various access errors and bogus times of 0/0/70 0:0:0 +0000. Without the 
debug files, it's difficult to pinpoint what's going on, and I get no 
help from the server end as pine is not supported. However, their pine 
3.91 client does seem to work, so for the time being I shall give up on 
the debian version, unless someone has already encountered this problem 
and can suggest a fix.
David Wright, Open University, Earth Science Department, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA
U.K.  email: d.wright@open.ac.uk  tel: +44 1908 653 739  fax: +44 1908 655 151

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: