From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/36868
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: ShengHuo ZHU <zsh@cs.rochester.edu>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: Gnus and \202 in Article buffer again
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 19:20:21 -0700
Message-ID: <2n4rsinb16.fsf@piglet.jia.vnet>
References: <m3ofqtrnhp.fsf@SnowWhite.SuSE.cz>
	<m3bsmr40fd.fsf@SnowWhite.SuSE.cz> <86r8vn14bf.fsf@gerd.segv.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035172382 10880 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:53:02 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:53:02 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: GNU Emacs pretest bug list <emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org>
Return-Path: <zsh@cs.rochester.edu>
Return-Path: <zsh@cs.rochester.edu>
Original-Received: (qmail 24261 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 02:20:50 -0000
Original-Received: from unknown (HELO zsh.2y.net) (131.241.79.242)
  by gnus.org with SMTP; 12 Jul 2001 02:20:50 -0000
Original-Received: (from zsh@localhost)
	by zsh.2y.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) id f6C2KMb21400;
	Wed, 11 Jul 2001 19:20:22 -0700
Original-To: ding@gnus.org
X-Attribution: ZSH
X-Face: 'IF:e51ib'Qbl^(}l^&4-J`'P!@[4~O|&k#:@Gld#b/]oMq&`&FVY._3+b`mzp~Jeve~/#/
 ERD!OTe<86UhyN=l`mrPY)M7_}`Ktt\K+58Z!hu7>qU,i.N7TotU[FYE(f1;}`g2xj!u*l`^&=Q!g{
 *q|<EDbQtg9{wfQuI,#r#{'A,\!95my:/,]"s,O4nzqxNL.}WrHA>ddto|nkt"$r,K$[)"|6,elPH=
 GJ6Q
In-Reply-To: <86r8vn14bf.fsf@gerd.segv.de> (gerd.moellmann@t-online.de's
 message of "12 Jul 2001 00:36:20 +0200")
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/21.0.104
Original-Lines: 14
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:36868
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:36868

gerd.moellmann@t-online.de (Gerd Moellmann) writes:

>> First, I thought that this is problem in Emacs itself, but this Gerd's
>> patch was commited to both CVS Gnus and to CVS of Emacs so I was fooled :-)
>> I do not know what is the correct solution though. Will leave this on
>> Shenghuo and Gerd. Uff ;-)
> 
> What I fixed is clearly a bug; Kenichi reported that M-x gnus can
> change the multibyteness of random buffers.  Probably fixing that
> bug uncovered another.

Yes. It is the case.

ShengHuo