On Friday 07 of June 2019, Wols Lists wrote:
> On 07/06/19 10:07, Luboš Luňák wrote:
> >> For what its worth those sample documents are not "realworld" user
> >> documents, but the output of fuzzing engines so any non-catastrophic
> >> outcome is acceptable IMO
> >
> > I have avoided the assert
On 07/06/19 10:07, Luboš Luňák wrote:
> On Thursday 06 of June 2019, Caolán McNamara wrote:
>> On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 21:52 +0200, Luboš Luňák wrote:
>>> Any idea what to do about that? Is it really ok that we just refuse
>>> to save it? Or should we save it even though the contents may be
>>>
On Thursday 06 of June 2019, Caolán McNamara wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 21:52 +0200, Luboš Luňák wrote:
> > Any idea what to do about that? Is it really ok that we just refuse
> > to save it? Or should we save it even though the contents may be
> > broken?
>
> For what its worth those sample
On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 21:52 +0200, Luboš Luňák wrote:
> Any idea what to do about that? Is it really ok that we just refuse
> to save it? Or should we save it even though the contents may be
> broken?
For what its worth those sample documents are not "realworld" user
documents, but the output of
On Monday 03 of June 2019, Jan-Marek Glogowski wrote:
> Am 03.06.19 um 21:52 schrieb Luboš Luňák:
> > Ok, so it's not a problem with my code, my changes just happened to show
> > the problem, and the problem is that those documents are broken. If you
> > try to unzip the documents, it will
Am 03.06.19 um 21:52 schrieb Luboš Luňák:
> On Monday 03 of June 2019, Caolán McNamara wrote:
>> On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 12:23 +0200, Luboš Luňák wrote:
>>> On Thursday 30 of May 2019, Michael Meeks wrote:
+ some in the zip area - assuming they are threading related.
>>>
>>> Is this
On Monday 03 of June 2019, Caolán McNamara wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 12:23 +0200, Luboš Luňák wrote:
> > On Thursday 30 of May 2019, Michael Meeks wrote:
> > > + some in the zip area - assuming they are threading related.
> >
> > Is this about those documents such
> > as
