Re: September Gnus v0.90 is released

[Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com>]

>>>>> "michael" == michael lamoureux <lamour@engin.umich.edu> writes:

michael>  "steven" == Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com> writes:
>>>>>>> "michael" == michael lamoureux <lamour@engin.umich.edu> writes:

michael> In several of my mail groups, the 'E' mark got removed from
michael> all of the messages somehow when I went from 0.86 to 0.90.
michael> All of the messages that had this happen showed up again in
michael> the summary buffer as if they were new mail.

steven> What kind of mail group do you use?  I haven't seen it in nnml.

michael> nnml.  The really odd thing was that it didn't happen in all
michael> of the groups.  Only about 3 or 4 of them.

This has been seen before, back in the dawn of sgnus (around 0.12)
Lars changed the structure of the Group info so that it was no longer
backwards compatible, causing lossage with .newsrcs created with a
newer sgnus but run against an older gnus.  The lossage being all
marks being lost.  This was reported fixed in later versions of Gnus
5.0 (by .13?) but I never tested it.

Did you perchance, create those groups with 5.0, or mix usage with 5.0?
If it was just expiration marks and not all marks, what kind of
expiration settings are you using?

Losing marks in an nntp newsgroup is inconvenient, losing marks in a
mail group, especially one associated with a high-volume mailing list
is a tragedy (or the equivalent of a serious mailbombing).

Speaking of which, does anyone use numbered backups on their .newsrc?

Regards,
-- 
steve@miranova.com baur
Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be proofread for $250/hour.
Andrea Seastrand: For your vote on the Telecom bill, I will vote for anyone
except you in November.