Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0 on a still to be determined date in the near future. The original upgrade date has been delayed.
Bug 63255 - named.conf man-page and groff disagree on format(s)
named.conf man-page and groff disagree on format(s)
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: caching-nameserver (Show other bugs)
ia64 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Florian La Roche
David Lawrence
: 63551 64077 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2002-04-11 14:43 EDT by Glen A. Foster
Modified: 2007-04-18 12:41 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2002-04-25 00:50:13 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
stderr output from "man named.conf" (10.98 KB, text/plain)
2002-04-11 14:44 EDT, Glen A. Foster
no flags Details

  None (edit)
Description Glen A. Foster 2002-04-11 14:43:03 EDT
Description of Problem: On my IA64 box when I run "man named.conf", I see a slew
of errors (307 lines of output) written to stderr that (IMO) should not exist. 
I will attach the file after this defect is committed.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

# rpm -q groff caching-nameserver

How Reproducible: 100%

# man named.conf > OUT 2> ERR
... yields the file (ERR) I am about to attach
Comment 1 Glen A. Foster 2002-04-11 14:44:02 EDT
Created attachment 53466 [details]
stderr output from "man named.conf"
Comment 2 Glen A. Foster 2002-04-15 14:28:25 EDT
*** Bug 63551 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 3 Dax Kelson 2002-04-25 00:50:09 EDT
*** Bug 64077 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 4 Florian La Roche 2002-11-03 15:41:35 EST
Most of these are gone with the current versions.


Florian La Roche
Comment 5 Glen A. Foster 2002-11-04 10:41:27 EST
There is a change made to the code (a new version, I presume from your message) 
and you closed the bug WONTFIX?  That seems strange to me.  How about re-
opening it and closing it RAWHIDE or CURRENTRELEASE?  That indicates that the 
bug was actually repaired... and you claim it is in the latest version.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.