www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

D - SD Expo

reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
The D presentation is on the schedule:

http://www.cmpevents.com/SDw/a.asp?option=G&V=3&id=228826

See you all there!
Nov 18 2003
parent reply "Jan Knepper" <jan smartsoft.us> writes:
Saw this in OE!

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:bpe5jj$pt1$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 The D presentation is on the schedule:

 http://www.cmpevents.com/SDw/a.asp?option=G&V=3&id=228826

 See you all there!

Nov 19 2003
parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Jan Knepper" <jan smartsoft.us> wrote in message
news:bphd1v$2feo$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Saw this in OE!

The problem is not that you saw it. I can see all the new messages just fine. The problem is the unread message counter in the left pane inevitably shows exactly twice the number of messages in the group as being unread. Even if in the top pane, they are *all* read. In other words, OE somehow believes there are 3 times as many messages in the newsgroup as are actually there. Since I think you compacted and renumbered the message base twice, that does not seem to be a coincidence.
Nov 19 2003
next sibling parent "Sammy" <sammy.deroy sympatico.ca> writes:
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:bphf7i$2igf$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In other words, OE somehow believes there are 3 times as many messages in
 the newsgroup as are actually there. Since I think you compacted and
 renumbered the message base twice, that does not seem to be a coincidence.

I am glad to see someone else has the problem. Now i know that my OE installation is not corrupted. there is no way to make OE reset the read count. ie: mark all read catch up delete all message, reset the ng, redownload every thing, mark all read,... unsubscribe, then subscribe, then download all thes messages, then ... delete everything, clean up the registry, then remove the account news.digitalmars.com, add it again, ... nothing, absolutely nothing can prevent OE to say that the D newsgroup contains about 38399 unread messages. I can never download more then about half that number of messages. I tried with 3 news-reader to be sure OE is not messed up. Always the same result. Of course, I am not complaining, just talking about it. Thans for all your work and efforts... -- sammy --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.542 / Virus Database: 336 - Release Date: 2003-11-18
Nov 20 2003
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jan Knepper <jan smartsoft.us> writes:
Walter wrote:

 The problem is not that you saw it. I can see all the new messages just
 fine. The problem is the unread message counter in the left pane inevitably
 shows exactly twice the number of messages in the group as being unread.
 Even if in the top pane, they are *all* read.
 
 In other words, OE somehow believes there are 3 times as many messages in
 the newsgroup as are actually there. Since I think you compacted and
 renumbered the message base twice, that does not seem to be a coincidence.

OK, how did get in my mind than that OE users where not seeing certain articles...??? I thought that was part of the issue as well. I guess I have to many things on my plate at times... Will check into this later. Thanks! Jan -- ManiaC++ Jan Knepper
Nov 20 2003
parent reply Jan Knepper <jan smartsoft.us> writes:
Jan Knepper wrote:
 OK, how did get in my mind than that OE users where not seeing certain 
 articles...??? I thought that was part of the issue as well.
 I guess I have to many things on my plate at times... Will check into 
 this later.

Well, first check... (Had to start that cursed Outlook again)... My Outlook displays 6370 for the number of unread messages. With the following current response: group c++ 211 9668 1 3298 c++ This is exactly n - l which is: 9668 - 3298 = 6370 This seems to be what OE does. Unfortunately this is an incorrect determination of the number of unread articles, see what the PFC says about the value of 'n'. The only way to give a true number of articles unread the newsreader should read all the headers from 'f' to 'l' or from '1' to '3298' and match those against internal tracking and calculate the number. The reason for this is that the following could be a completely valid response: group c++ 211 1000 1 3298 c++ Yes, I know that 1000 is much less than 3298, but news acticles usually can be cancelled i.e. if you use a decent news reader. Netscape, Mozilla and Thunderbird are all able to do this. I.e. directly after you post you realize that you want to cancel. This will drop the article, but not adjust the article number. Having said this the only conclusion I can come to is that OE uses the RPC value's seriously wrong. In the mean time I will see if the estimated counts can be fixed in some way, but no guarantees... RFC 977: 3.2.2. Responses 211 n f l s group selected (n = estimated number of articles in group, f = first article number in the group, l = last article number in the group, s = name of the group.) Thanks! Jan -- ManiaC++ Jan Knepper
Nov 20 2003
parent reply "tjulian" <tjulian removethis.oldi.com> writes:
I have had this problem in the past with OE. Also, I did find a link
where the same problem is discussed. It appears that n should not be
greater than l - f.

http://lists.litech.org/pipermail/inn-workers/2003q2/001772.html

--
TimJ

Jan Knepper wrote:

 Jan Knepper wrote:
 
 Well, first check...
 (Had to start that cursed Outlook again)... My Outlook displays 6370
 for the number of unread messages. With the following current
 response:
 
 group c++
 211 9668 1 3298 c++
 
 This is exactly n - l which is: 9668 - 3298 = 6370
 
 This seems to be what OE does. Unfortunately this is an incorrect
 determination of the number of unread articles, see what the PFC says
 about the value of 'n'. The only way to give a true number of
 articles unread the newsreader should read all the headers from 'f'
 to 'l' or from '1' to '3298' and match those against internal
 tracking and calculate the number. The reason for this is that the
 following could be a completely valid response:
 

Nov 20 2003
parent "Gisle Vanem" <giva users.sourceforge.net> writes:
"tjulian" <tjulian removethis.oldi.com> wrote:

 I have had this problem in the past with OE. Also, I did find a link
 where the same problem is discussed. It appears that n should not be
 greater than l - f.
 
 http://lists.litech.org/pipermail/inn-workers/2003q2/001772.html

That message confirms that Pine also behaves like OE. No suprice since INN or the reindexing program Jan used is violating the "best practice" founded in the RFCs. --gv
Nov 20 2003
prev sibling parent reply Andy Friesen <andy ikagames.com> writes:
Walter wrote:

 "Jan Knepper" <jan smartsoft.us> wrote in message
 news:bphd1v$2feo$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 
Saw this in OE!

The problem is not that you saw it. I can see all the new messages just fine. The problem is the unread message counter in the left pane inevitably shows exactly twice the number of messages in the group as being unread. Even if in the top pane, they are *all* read. In other words, OE somehow believes there are 3 times as many messages in the newsgroup as are actually there. Since I think you compacted and renumbered the message base twice, that does not seem to be a coincidence.

Crazy. Thunderbird says there are five more unread messages than there actually are. Always just five. (and one more in D.gnu) -- andy
Nov 20 2003
next sibling parent reply Jan Knepper <jan smartsoft.us> writes:
Andy Friesen wrote:

 Crazy.  Thunderbird says there are five more unread messages than there 
 actually are.  Always just five. (and one more in D.gnu)

That you can clean up by marking them read AFAIK. -- ManiaC++ Jan Knepper
Nov 20 2003
parent John Reimer <jjreimer telus.net> writes:
Jan Knepper wrote:

 Andy Friesen wrote:
 
 Crazy.  Thunderbird says there are five more unread messages than 
 there actually are.  Always just five. (and one more in D.gnu)

That you can clean up by marking them read AFAIK.

That is kind of true. But there was an annoying problem in the last Thunderbird version I had in which a topic remained underlined as if there were still undread messages in it, but when one opened it up nothing was in it. This remained no matter what a person tried to do. I haven't seen this problem in Thunderbird 0.3, though. It just does the slightly weird thing that I described in my other post. Otherwise it seems to work fine.
Nov 20 2003
prev sibling parent John Reimer <jjreimer telus.net> writes:
 
 
 Crazy.  Thunderbird says there are five more unread messages than there 
 actually are.  Always just five. (and one more in D.gnu)
 
  -- andy
 

Actually, I use Thunderbird too; and for the most part, it works great. I did have a similar issue at one point earlier this year: Thunderbird always had 1 or 2 unread messages indicated in parenthesis, while there were actually no unread messages listed in the headings list. This problem seems to be gone with the most up to date version. Now when I first click on the newsgroup, Thunderbird refreshes the D list (checks for new messages). Initially the number of new messages (shown in parenthesis) will read something like 12. Then about 2 seconds later, the number automatically adjusts down to 7 (a difference of 5 seems to be a regular occurrence), where 7 is the true number of unread messages. This happens every time, the group is refreshed and there are new messages. Thunderbird just automatically adjusts to the correct number, I guess. I don't really understand where the 5 phantom messages come from, but it is momentarily noticeable. I used to use Outlook Express. I can't stand it. And honestly, I don't understand why some people still use it when email programs like thunderbird and mozilla are now around. They are much more feature rich. The only frustration I have with them is the lack of current support for syncing with my Palm Tungsten C. It seems all PDA's these days will only sync email with Outlook. Bleah! Although, I think the linux integration suite may work well...just haven't tried it. At any rate, I certainly appreciate what Jan is doing. Thanks for keeping this newsgroup up and running. I have little time or skill to comment in the newsgroup, but it sure makes for great reading :). Later, John
Nov 20 2003