-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Sorry Adam for being not precise.
[email protected] (Adam Sjøgren) writes: > On Sat, 08 May 2010 15:20:48 +0200, Merciadri wrote: > >> I am still unable to say why it does not work for the two groups given >> in the OP. > > What groups was that? > > In the original article you wrote: > > "Let's say that I need to post some message on two groups on usenet, > say hierarchy.group1 & hierarchy.group2." > > ... Sorry, I was sure of having written some real groups. I tested with linux.debian.user and comp.sys.hp48, together. These are groups which my Gnus did not post the article to. >> It might be because they both exist, but would it be that? > > That question does not parse for me. I understand why you did not understand it. I had forgotten the expression `to my news-gate', i.e. you should have read == It might be because they both exist to the news-gate, but would it be that? == The combination linux.debian.user + comp.sys.hp48 never works. That is, each time I try to send an article to both groups, it is sent nowhere. But I have only observed this behaviour with these two groups. >> I do not want to try with known groups (such as linux.debian.user, >> etc.), because it would pollute the group! > > But polluting gnu.emacs.gnus is just fine? Hrmpf. Not at all. The fact is that adding some `test' message to a discussion is not really polluting, it even takes place in the discussion. However, copying an answer of an already-launched dicussion on another usenet group makes it appear as a new article, which is clearly polluting. Don't you agree? > linux.debian.user sounds more like a mailinglist than a usenet group to > me, but since you used made-up group names in the first article, it is > hard to say. Yes, but posting to the ML or posting to the usenet group sends the message to the other, so that both are synchronized. > I think it is a fair guess that your problem isn't with Gnus. You might be thinking this because I was so unprecise that I was looking incompetent, and that, to my level, Gnus should not be bugging, and the error would only come from the user, i.e. me. If it is that, no problem, I understand that I should have been more precise. If it is not that, what would it be coming from? I have currently only one set of two groups which do not like to receive the same article in same time. - -- Merciadri Luca See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/ - -- Many receive advice; only the wise profit from it. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/> iEYEARECAAYFAkvlxXAACgkQM0LLzLt8Mhwy+gCfYFsCCYiWYnSE3OmKEA7REajT FOMAn35t5SiGqFZkXcpxF78Y37yn0edu =Hn2t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ info-gnus-english mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-gnus-english
