Re: nntps and posting.

[Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org>]

>>>>> In <877iul7ic6.fsf@lrde.org> Michaël Cadilhac wrote:

>>>>> --- nntp.el	05 Feb 2006 14:56:44 +0100	1.31
>>>>> +++ nntp.el	25 Dec 2006 13:48:53 +0100
>>>>> @@ -451,10 +451,11 @@
>>>>>  				wait-for nnheader-callback-function)
>>>>>  	  ;; If nothing to wait for, still remove possibly echo'ed commands.
>>>>>  	  ;; We don't have echos if nntp-open-connection-function
>>>>> -	  ;; is `nntp-open-network-stream', so we skip this in that case.
>>>>> +	  ;; is `nntp-open-network-stream' or `nntp-open-ssl-stream',
>>>>> +	  ;; so we skip this in that cases.
>>>>>  	  (unless (or wait-for
>>>>> -		      (equal nntp-open-connection-function
>>>>> -			     'nntp-open-network-stream))
>>>>> +		      (memq nntp-open-connection-function
>>>>> +			    '(nntp-open-network-stream nntp-open-ssl-stream)))
>>>>>  	    (nntp-accept-response)
>>>>>  	    (save-excursion
>>>>>  	      (set-buffer buffer)

[...]

> Gimme a ?P! an ?I! an ?N! a ?G! Intern this and gimme a 'PING! Yeah!
> ... Well, just pinging.

Let us do it and wait for the response.  I've installed the
patch in the trunk.  What I can do when someone complains is
only to remove it, though.

Regards,