From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/11465 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Graham Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: TODO idea: Date: 26 Jun 1997 15:27:00 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1997 <19970626093841.17915.qmail@sunsite.auc.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035151167 30392 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:59:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:59:27 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from sandy.calag.com (root@sandy [206.190.83.128]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id OAA17082 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 1997 14:32:07 -0700 Original-Received: from xemacs.org (xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu [128.174.252.16]) by sandy.calag.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id OAA17601 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 1997 14:31:49 -0700 Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA19053 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 1997 16:31:21 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from claymore.vcinet.com (claymore.vcinet.com [208.205.12.23]) by ifi.uio.no with SMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Thu, 26 Jun 1997 21:27:13 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 20567 invoked by uid 504); 26 Jun 1997 19:27:07 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 20564 invoked from network); 26 Jun 1997 19:27:06 -0000 Original-Received: from urth.acsu.buffalo.edu (qmailr@128.205.7.9) by claymore.vcinet.com with SMTP; 26 Jun 1997 19:27:06 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 18923 invoked by uid 305); 26 Jun 1997 19:27:01 -0000 Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: anonymous@sunsite.auc.dk's message of 26 Jun 1997 09:38:41 -0000 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.55/XEmacs 19.15 Original-Lines: 30 Original-Xref: altair.xemacs.org dgnus-list:1855 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:11465 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:11465 (what's this anonymous@sunsite stuff) argh. this sounds like a recipe for disaster. i think my system is somewhat risky but this sound flagrantly dangerous. i lock the active file in nnheader.el and it to decide what the next file should be named (much like the news system) but i still sometimes have a collision (for reasons completely unobvious to me). the insertion code won't overwrite an existing file though so it's not fatal. i just ignore the ``.overview has changed'' messages. arne> I do not think this is a major problem. The active file and arne> .overview files in all folders that are touched since the last arne> time I run my splitting program is recreated from outside arne> gnus. So if nnml changes some of these files it is no big deal. >> This idea gests proposed reasonably frequently, but has never gained >> widespread acceptance because of the potential for bad things >> happening. people propose it because it's a good idea. of course if gnus could incorporate 1,000 messages in < 30 seconds on my machine i'd use gnus movemail. -- paul pjg@acsu.Buffalo.EDU |public keys at: | http://urth.acsu.Buffalo.EDU/~pjg/key.html if the above contains opinions they are mine unless marked otherwise.