I'm finally feeling good enough to get some info on that bug I was talking about.
Many, many posts, including some of my own made with 0.14.2.91, show up in overviews/headers, but refuse to appear when I click on them to download. If I'm running pan 0.94 from a konsole, it'll print the following assertion error: (article-cache.cc:398 get_message): assertion "this->contains(*it)" failed. I normally use gcc-4.1.0 with a number of CXXFLAGS, but compiling with 3.4.6 and with no optimizations whatsoever (only -march=k8 -pipe in CXXFLAGS) yields the same results. Likewise, I tried moving .pan2 and rerunning pan 0.94, in case something was corrupted here. No difference. pan 0.14.2.91 downloads the same posts just fine. I checked the .pan2 cache, and the message doesn't even get cached, tho it does appear to download (net activity and the status bar says it's downloading, very briefly). Below my sig is a copy of one such message, as retrieved directly from the pan 0.14.2.91 cache. It's mine, so if necessary I can post the message as saved in 0.14's pan.sent (the file system version, not just the one pan displays) as well. (BTW, Message attached as text using the pan-attach script I posted sometime ago. Crude solution, but it works...) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html Path: dukenews1.cox.net!duke.cox.net!cox.net!p01!dukeread03.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Organization: Organization? Me? Subject: Re: Craig's List User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table) Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newsgroups: cox.internet.community.phoenix References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> x-munging1: Usenet replies preferred, If replying by mail, x-munging2: do ALL the following to avoid the spam traps: x-munging3: 1) Use plain text. HTML format auto-trashed. x-munging4: 2) Kill address reply2group and please phrases. x-munging5: 3) Put " -news" at the END of the subject x-munging6: (no quotes, space, dash, news, END) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 49 Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 06:36:44 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.230.97.182 X-Complaints-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Trace: dukeread03 1144589802 68.230.97.182 (Sun, 09 Apr 2006 09:36:42 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 09:36:42 EDT Xref: cox.net cox.internet.community.phoenix:8005 X-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 09:36:43 EDT (dukenews1.cox.net) medadm posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Sun, 09 Apr 2006 00:08:59 -0700: > Any idea why I cannot resolve craigslist.org of late? I've made no changes > to any of my configurations nor have I installed any new software or > hardware. > > I have typed the url or clicked on it from my favorites but the outcome is > the same. I will ping it as well with 100% packet loss as a result. > > Is anyone else experiencing this? > > TIA for any suggestions you might offer. It comes up fine here -- using my own DNS, not Cox's. $host craigslist.org craigslist.org has address 66.150.243.20 Try entering that IP address in your browser, and/or pinging it. If it works, you know it's a DNS problem. If not, it's a route problem. The most likely DNS problem is often the result of a web accelerator gone bad. Many of them will stick the IPs for regularly visited sites in your HOSTS file, where they do accelerate your visits by cutting out the remote DNS lookup step -- UNTIL the IP address changes and no longer belongs to that domain name. Then you get sent off somewhere else. Back on MSWormOS 9x, the CLI ping command didn't use the MSWormOS resolver system so bypassed the HOSTS file and its possible incorrectness, but I'm not sure if that's still the case with eXPrivacy or not. In any case, if you can get to the site by IP address, definitely check your windows dir (or whatever dir eXPrivacy uses) and see if there's a HOSTS file (not HOSTS.SAM, the .sam file is an inactive sample. If so, temporarily rename it and see if you can then get to the site via regular domain name. The HOSTS file itself is not something MSWormOS has by default, only something it can use, so you should have no issues removing it, but always be careful when following instructions from someone on the net (you don't know me, maybe I'm having a joke on you -- I'm not, but how are you to know that), and rename things to see if they are actually needed, before deleting them. You can always rename them back if necessary, or delete them after a month or two of testing, if indeed they aren't needed. -- Duncan - Newsgroup replies preferred. See x-munging headers. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html _______________________________________________ Pan-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-users
