insert-buffer vs insert-buffer-substring

insert-buffer vs insert-buffer-substring

[David S. Goldberg]

After doing a cvs update this morning, I've been unable to use
message-yank-original.  I get the following backtrace:

Debugger entered--Lisp error: (wrong-type-argument integer-or-marker-p nil)
  message-cite-original-without-signature()
  message-yank-original()
  gnus-inews-yank-articles((29067))
  gnus-post-news([...elided...])
  gnus-summary-followup((29067) nil)
  gnus-summary-followup-with-original(nil)
  call-interactively(gnus-summary-followup-with-original)

The problem appears to a bad combination of my use of supercite
(mail-citation-hook is set to sc-cite-original) and the change from
insert-buffer to insert-buffer-substring.  Not sure if it's an XEmacs
issue or not, but in case, 

(emacs-version)^J
XEmacs 21.4 (patch 17) "Jumbo Shrimp" [Lucid] (i686-pc-cygwin, Mule) of Wed Jun  1 2005 on mm117419-pc

Reverting to insert-buffer works, as does setting mail-citation-hook
to nil, but I'd rather not do that.  I often generate replies to one
message but cut/paste text from others and find that sc is the best
tool I can find for getting the citations right as I do so.

Thanks,
-- 
Dave Goldberg
david.goldberg6@verizon.net

Re: insert-buffer vs insert-buffer-substring

[David S. Goldberg]

>>>>> On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 07:32:44 +0900, Katsumi Yamaoka
>>>>> <yamaoka@jpl.org> said:

> I've fixed it just now.  Sorry.

Confirmed.  Thanks!

-- 
Dave Goldberg
david.goldberg6@verizon.net