From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/10204
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: old entries in .newsrc.eld..
Date: 12 Mar 1997 17:00:33 +0100
Sender: larsi@proletcult.slip.ifi.uio.no
Message-ID: <m2k9ndp0bi.fsf@proletcult.slip.ifi.uio.no>
References: <lvzpwc0zgj.fsf@sargasso.fukt.hk-r.se> <m2lo7vrpyf.fsf@proletcult.slip.ifi.uio.no> <rvbu8q9q5d.fsf@sdnp5.ucsd.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035150113 23055 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:41:53 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:41:53 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: <ding-request@ifi.uio.no>
Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2])
	by deanna.miranova.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA04514
	for <steve@miranova.com>; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 08:26:01 -0800
Original-Received: from proletcult.slip.ifi.uio.no (root@ppp13.larris.ifi.uio.no [129.240.68.113]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) 
	id <RAA04796@ifi.uio.no> for <ding@ifi.uio.no> ; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 17:03:08 +0100
Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by proletcult.slip.ifi.uio.no (8.8.2/8.8.2) id RAA10051; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 17:00:40 +0100
Mail-Copies-To: never
Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no
In-Reply-To: David Moore's message of 11 Mar 1997 11:37:02 -0800
Original-Lines: 15
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.26/Emacs 19.34
X-Face: &w!^oO<W.WBH]FsTP:P0f9X6M-ygaADlA_)eF$<UwQzj7:C=Gi<a?/_4$LX^@$Qq7-O&XHp
 lDARi8e8iT<(A$LWAZD*xjk^')/wI5nG;1cNB>~dS|}-P0~ge{$c!h\<y
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:10204
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:10204

David Moore <dmoore@ucsd.edu> writes:

> 	Which of course means that if you have even 1 item in the cache
> from 3 years ago, nothing since then will ever get purged.  Perhaps
> it'd be a good idea to intersect these with the union of the real active
> range and the items in the cache.  Using the current approach of taking
> the smallest number in the real active & cache and the largest number in
> real active & cache leaves a lot to be desired.

Yup.  However, the real active range is now simply thrown away, so one
would have to have some sort of double bookkeeping thing going on...

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@ifi.uio.no * Lars Ingebrigtsen