The behaviour you observe means most probably that we have some rare
problem when reading user headers from the edited file. Since you
seem to be able to reproduce this problem, could you please give us
a mail message which reproduces this when you try to send it, and
(possibly minimized) my_hdr and lists settings?
On 1999-10-05 20:48:22 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 20:48:22 +0200
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: mutt segfaults + gdb output
> Reply-To: Rutger Nijlunsing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Hi *,
>
> My mutt 1.0pre2i on Solaris segfaults after pressing 'y' to send a
> reply to a mail. The mail to which I'm replying might miss some
> required headers.
>
> gdb gives:
>
> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
> 0xef6ce0a4 in strchr ()
> (gdb) up
> #1 0x88af4 in encode_headers (h=0xede68) at sendlib.c:1375
> 1375 if ((p = strchr (h->data, ':')))
> (gdb) print h->data
> $1 = 0x0
> (gdb) print h
> $2 = (LIST *) 0xede68
> (gdb) print h->next
> $3 = (struct list_t *) 0xede78
> (gdb) print *(h->next)
> $4 = {
> data = 0xf1220 "Organization: Philips", next = 0xede88}
> (gdb) print *h
> $5 = {data = 0x0, next = 0xede78}
> (gdb)
>
>
> I changed if ((p = strchr (h->data, ':'))) to if ((h->data) && (p =
> strchr (h->data, ':'))), but this causes a new segfault somewhat later
> in the process, which leaves a lockfile for my "sent" mailbox around.
>
> Someone got any idea?
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Rutger Nijlunsing, rutger @ null.net ----------------------------- Linux! --
> Don't BiCapitalize without extremely good reason: it messes up the natural
> human-eyeball search order -- Your Friendly Neighborhood Archive Maintainers
> +31-40 ----------------------------------------------------------- ^X^S^X^Cs
>
