From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/7387 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Patch for async fetch munging articles bug Date: 31 Jul 1996 12:59:56 +0200 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035147706 7054 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:01:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:01:46 +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 IAA05788 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 08:24:14 -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 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 17:04:25 +0200 Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by hler.ifi.uio.no ; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 17:04:41 +0200 Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no In-Reply-To: Sudish Joseph's message of 31 Jul 1996 03:44:36 -0400 Original-Lines: 28 X-Mailer: Red Gnus v0.2/Emacs 19.29 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:7387 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:7387 Sudish Joseph writes: > The problem is basically in #'nntp-process-filter, which assumes that > by searching -backwards- from the end for the wait-for'ed string, it > won't skip over other instances of the same string. However, multiple > replies can pour in by the time that filter kicks in. (I'm not too > sure about that last statement, it only seems to happen for the very > first group you visit.) I don't think that should happen. The prefetching is serialized, and the only thing that happens on that particular connection is the article prefetch... But I've also seen odd things happening, but whenever I edebug to try to see what's going on, everything works perfectly. Anyways, I think I'll rewrite the nntp function that currently uses process filters to use `after-change-function' instead. That'll probably be more efficient and will produce less garbage strings. > PS: For a gnus-reopen-all-connections command, does it suffice to > delete all process buffers in nntp-connection-alist? Yup. -- "Yes. The journey through the human heart would have to wait until some other time."