From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/37086 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Saving .newsrc upon *Summary* exit Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:37:21 -0400 Message-ID: References: <2nr8v65i4g.fsf@piglet.jia.vnet> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035172564 12037 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:56:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:56:04 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 22274 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 22:37:22 -0000 Original-Received: from multivac.student.cwru.edu (HELO multivac.cwru.edu) (261@129.22.96.25) by gnus.org with SMTP; 24 Jul 2001 22:37:22 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 21180 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jul 2001 22:37:43 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: (Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE's message of "Tue, 24 Jul 2001 23:55:55 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/20.7 Original-Lines: 22 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:37086 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:37086 Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Gro=DFjohann) writes: > On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Paul Jarc wrote: >> Now, since I've gotten into the habit of not leaving *Summary* >> buffers hanging around, I can leave one Gnus running and safely run >> a second one in a second Emacs (on the same machine, using the same >> account, .emacs, etc.). >=20 > This sounds dangerous. Yes, it sounds that way, but I don't think it is. Anyway, I'm only using nntp and nnmaildir, and nnmaildir tolerates even less synchronized concurrency. So I'm not risking much. > Why don't you do M-x gnus-slave RET for the second one? Mostly because I didn't know about it. But reading the manual - what happens if I run a slave, quit from it, and then run a slave again without touching the master? Will the second slave notice the changes from the first? With my way, it will, and that's what I want. paul