Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: mailx man page description doesn't match mailx implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504899
Summary: mailx man page description doesn't match mailx implementation Product: Fedora Version: 10 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: mailx AssignedTo: varekova@redhat.com ReportedBy: redhat3@zacglen.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: p.van.egdom@gmail.com, redhat3@zacglen.com, dmitry@butskoy.name, varekova@redhat.com, fedora-triage-list@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Clone Of: 188313
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #188313 +++
Description of problem: The options for mailx descriped in the mailx man page does not match the implementation of mailx.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): mailx-12.4-1
How reproducible: always
Steps to Reproduce: 1. run "man mailx" 2. use that information to try to use /bin/mailx 3.
Actual results:
Many options fail. For example, the "-e" option is described in the man page, but running "mailx -e" produces: mailx: invalid option -- e Usage: mail [-iInv] [-s subject] [-c cc-addr] [-b bcc-addr] to-addr ... [-- sendmail-options ...] mail [-iInNv] -f [name] mail [-iInNv] [-u user]
Expected results: The options described in the mailx man page should match what the mailx program accepts.
Additional info:
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504899
Danny Yee danny@anatomy.usyd.edu.au changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |danny@anatomy.usyd.edu.au
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504899
--- Comment #1 from Dmitry Butskoy dmitry@butskoy.name 2009-06-16 10:12:02 EDT --- Looks strange. Does "man mail" describe "-e" option as well or not? ("man mailx" refers to /usr/share/man/man1p/mailx.1p.gz from the "man-pages" package, whereas "man mail" refers to own mailx's manual /usr/share/man/man1/mail.1.gz)
What is your output of "which mailx" or "type mailx", and "rpm -qf /bin/mailx" ?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504899
--- Comment #2 from JW redhat3@zacglen.com 2009-06-16 10:22:20 EDT --- Do you have access to a Fedora system where you can check it out?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504899
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry Butskoy dmitry@butskoy.name 2009-06-16 10:45:47 EDT --- Sure! But on my system, it works fine... ;)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504899
Walter Neumann neumann@math.columbia.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |neumann@math.columbia.edu
--- Comment #4 from Walter Neumann neumann@math.columbia.edu 2009-10-12 09:15:55 EDT --- I have the same problem. Turns out I am not using the mailx from the fedora package -- at some point in the distant past I'd installed another in /usr/local/bin when the fedora one crashed. Just checked the current fedora mailx and it seems fine. I suspect JW's problem may be similar, in which case this is notabug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504899
Dmitry Butskoy dmitry@butskoy.name changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NOTABUG
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504899
--- Comment #5 from JW redhat3@zacglen.com 2009-10-12 10:01:32 EDT --- It *was* a bug.
It was fixed in a previous version: somewhere just before 12.4-1 and possibly as a result of this bug report.
So please amend from NOTABUG to CURRENTRELEASE or just plain RESOLED (there should be such a Status or dont bugs ever get fixed?)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504899
--- Comment #6 from Dmitry Butskoy dmitry@butskoy.name 2009-10-12 10:11:47 EDT --- For comment #5 :
It was fixed in a previous version: somewhere just before 12.4-1
According to http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/mailx/F-10/, mailx in F10 was last changed 14 months ago (ie. in August 2008), whereas your bug report about F10's mailx is dated at 2009-06-09 ...
triage@lists.fedoraproject.org