From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/6276 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Why no multiple *Article* buffers? Date: 20 May 1996 19:44:42 +0200 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035146756 3149 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:45:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:45:56 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from spork.callamer.com (root@spork.callamer.com [199.74.141.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id OAA11198 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 14:09:58 -0700 Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by spork.callamer.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA06800 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 14:08:19 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from eistla.ifi.uio.no (4867@eistla.ifi.uio.no [129.240.94.29]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 22:19:37 +0200 Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by eistla.ifi.uio.no ; Mon, 20 May 1996 22:19:35 +0200 Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no In-Reply-To: Scott Blachowicz's message of Mon, 20 May 1996 08:33:20 -0700 Original-Lines: 12 X-Mailer: September Gnus v0.90/Emacs 19.29 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:6276 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:6276 Scott Blachowicz writes: > So, what possible use is it to have a single *Article* buffer to handle > multiple *Summary* buffers? Having multiple article buffers can be somewhat confusing. At least I thought so after I switched to multiple article buffers, which can be done by setting `gnus-single-article-buffer' to nil. -- "Yes. The journey through the human heart would have to wait until some other time."