Your message dated Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:31:44 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line This bug was fixed by upstream in puf version 1.0.0
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 am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Jan 2004 01:24:32 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jan 15 19:24:32 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from c-67-165-50-62.client.comcast.net (mst.ath.cx) [67.165.50.62]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1AhIiu-0002yQ-00; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:24:32 -0600
Received: from mstoll by localhost with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 1AhIir-0002Xy-00; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 20:24:29 -0500
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Martin Stolle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: puf: -pr+ (pagerequisite) option doesn't follow 3xx responses
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.37
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 20:24:28 -0500
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Martin Stolle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-BadReturnPath: [EMAIL PROTECTED] rewritten as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
using "From" header
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_14
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on master.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_14
X-Spam-Level:
Package: puf
Version: 0.93.2a-1
Severity: normal
When running puf -pr+ on a page whose images are behind 302 redirects,
puf doesn't download the image (it does request the original image,
get's the 302 response, but doesn't follow)
Martin
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux martin1 2.4.23 #1 Thu Dec 11 01:00:56 EST 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Versions of packages puf depends on:
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-10 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
-- no debconf information
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 228008-done) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Jan 2006 17:31:53 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jan 23 09:31:53 2006
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from ip-26-10.sn1.eutelia.it
([62.94.26.10] helo=lorien.prato.linux.it ident=postfix)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
id 1F15Xl-0003Ee-4N
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 09:31:53 -0800
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by lorien.prato.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50B221560DB
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:31:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: from lorien.prato.linux.it ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (lorien [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP
id 31363-02-4 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:31:45 +0100 (CET)
Received: from uriel.local.lan (unknown [150.217.34.223])
by lorien.prato.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF8FC1560C1
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:31:45 +0100 (CET)
Received: by uriel.local.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 5EE5322E; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:31:45 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:31:44 +0100
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: This bug was fixed by upstream in puf version 1.0.0
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rwEMma7ioTxnRzrJ"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco Nenciarini)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at prato.linux.it
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
--rwEMma7ioTxnRzrJ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Package: puf
Version: 1.0.0-1
It looks like the bug has been fixed by upstream at version 1.0.0.
Regards
--=20
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Marco Nenciarini | Debian/GNU Linux Developer - Plug Member |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.prato.linux.it/~mnencia |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Key fingerprint =3D FED9 69C7 9E67 21F5 7D95 5270 6864 730D F095 E5E4
--rwEMma7ioTxnRzrJ
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFD1RMAaGRzDfCV5eQRAlSjAJ40TP525XSc0Kes+hGWeMWyu84aNQCggdsQ
TuAjdUjGBMKWgSMWHqSLafU=
=MztK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--rwEMma7ioTxnRzrJ--
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
