From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/65320
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general,gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Is this patch of gnus/pop3.el reasonable?
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 13:40:46 -0400
Message-ID: <E1IcPGA-0007vh-Lt@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <85ir5r2302.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1191260560 28749 80.91.229.12 (1 Oct 2007 17:42:40 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 17:42:40 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: ding@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, ratinox@peorth.gweep.net
To: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
Original-X-From: ding-owner+M13830@lists.math.uh.edu Mon Oct 01 19:42:36 2007
Return-path: <ding-owner+M13830@lists.math.uh.edu>
Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org
Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18])
	by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1IcPHv-00020f-VF
	for ding-account@gmane.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 19:42:36 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu)
	by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <ding-owner+M13830@lists.math.uh.edu>)
	id 1IcPH7-0003dl-Ii; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 12:41:45 -0500
Original-Received: from mx1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.32])
	by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <rms@gnu.org>)
	id 1IcPH6-0003dR-BQ
	for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 12:41:44 -0500
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51])
	by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.67)
	(envelope-from <rms@gnu.org>)
	id 1IcPH0-0003Dm-6K
	for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 12:41:44 -0500
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1IcPGr-0005oP-00
	for <ding@gnus.org>; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 19:41:29 +0200
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <rms@gnu.org>)
	id 1IcPGA-0007vh-Lt; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 13:40:46 -0400
In-reply-to: <85ir5r2302.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> (message from David Kastrup on
	Mon, 01 Oct 2007 00:38:05 +0200)
X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--)
List-ID: <ding.gnus.org>
Precedence: bulk
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:65320 gmane.emacs.devel:80094
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/65320>

    Now the question is whether this is a bad idea to check into upstream.
    I can't see that it will affect operation where the server is correct,
    and it might avoid hangs where it isn't.

    What do you think?

I am no expert on pop3, but if it is supposed to transmit CRLF
and never use just LF, then this can't hurt.