Bug 155807

Summary: mailsync-5.2.1-8: 2 * printf problems
Product: [openSUSE] SUSE Linux 10.1 Reporter: David Binderman <dcb314>
Component: BasesystemAssignee: Forgotten User ZhJd0F0L3x <forgotten_ZhJd0F0L3x>
Status: VERIFIED FIXED QA Contact: E-mail List <qa-bugs>
Severity: Minor    
Priority: P5 - None    
Version: unspecified   
Target Milestone: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: SuSE Linux 10.1   
Whiteboard:
Found By: Other Services Priority:
Business Priority: Blocker: ---
Marketing QA Status: --- IT Deployment: ---
Attachments: fix

Description David Binderman 2006-03-07 18:13:55 UTC
I just tried to compile package mailsync-5.2.1-8 with the GNU C compiler.

It said

1.

channel.cc:106: warning: too few arguments for format

The source code is

      fprintf( stderr, "Info: The msinfo box %s contains a message with"
                       " missing \"From\" or \"Subject\" header information\n");

I agree with the compiler.  One %s specifier, no trailing parameter.
Suggest code rework.

2.

store.cc:458: warning: too few arguments for format

The source code is

	printf( "No driver for store %s found\n");

Same again.
Comment 1 Forgotten User ZhJd0F0L3x 2006-03-08 16:39:02 UTC
the interesting thing is: where did you get the package from? AFAICS it is not included in any 10.1 beta and 10.0 still contains mailsync-5.2.1-5 ;-)
Comment 2 David Binderman 2006-03-08 18:54:20 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> the interesting thing is: where did you get the package from? AFAICS it is not
> included in any 10.1 beta and 10.0 still contains mailsync-5.2.1-5 ;-)

From the factory.

It does cause me some concern that you claim that this version of
this package isn't in any 10.1 beta.

Am I correct in assuming that all beta versions of 10.1 are 
snapshots of the factory [ until at least the 10.1 release 
candidates] ?


Comment 3 Forgotten User ZhJd0F0L3x 2006-03-08 19:18:15 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)

> From the factory.

ok, i didn't think of that :-)
 
> It does cause me some concern that you claim that this version of
> this package isn't in any 10.1 beta.

Well, looking at the code quality, i do not really want to have it in a product where i have to support it ;-).
But i will fix those errors. Thanks for reporting.

> Am I correct in assuming that all beta versions of 10.1 are 
> snapshots of the factory [ until at least the 10.1 release 
> candidates] ?

I think so, yes.
Comment 4 Forgotten User ZhJd0F0L3x 2006-07-03 15:17:38 UTC
Created attachment 92441 [details]
fix

i submitted a package with this fix to the build system, so it should end up in factory soon.
Comment 5 Forgotten User ZhJd0F0L3x 2006-07-03 15:18:03 UTC
fixed package submitted