From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/7257
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: Changing Default News Server
Date: 19 Jul 1996 01:51:58 +0200
Sender: larsi@ifi.uio.no
Message-ID: <w8shgr5ktlt.fsf@hler.ifi.uio.no>
References: <199607182343.QAA01742@wink.corp.sgi.com>
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 1035147590 6486 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:59:50 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:59:50 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no
Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id RAA32744 for <steve@miranova.com>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 17:02:40 -0700
Original-Received: from hler.ifi.uio.no (hler.ifi.uio.no [129.240.94.23]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) 
	id <BAA03300@ifi.uio.no> for <ding@ifi.uio.no> ; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 01:51:52 +0200
Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by hler.ifi.uio.no ; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 01:52:01 +0200
Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no
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
In-Reply-To: David Watson's message of Thu, 18 Jul 1996 16:43:02 -0700
Original-Lines: 21
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.2.37/XEmacs 19.14
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:7257
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:7257

David Watson <watson@wink.corp.sgi.com> writes:

> Years ago I wrote a quick script to read the active files on the old and
> new servers as close to simultaneously as possible, then, for each
> newsgroup found on the new server, take the delta between the high
> article numbers on the two servers, and apply that delta as a correction
> to the corresponding line in the reader's .newsrc file. 

The problem is that articles have a nasty tendency to arrive in
different order on different servers, so this straightforward (and
fast) approach will yield less than optimal results when you apply it
to two servers that are far from each other.

I'll probably do something similar, though.  Going through all
Message-ID's of all read and/or unread articles is out of the
question.  Perhaps one could get kinda good results by going through a
few groups and trying to guess how thorough one has to be?  

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