[Pan-users] Re: FC4 version

[Duncan]

beartooth posted <address@hidden>, excerpted
below,  on Sun, 26 Jun 2005 08:56:06 -0400:

> I'm a tad bit bemused about one thing. What was installed before was of
> course 0.14.2, as on the machine I'm using now, and all my linux other
> machines; it's been that way since 0.14.2 came out. Yum update found
> 0.14.2.91, and "upgraded" to that.
> 
> I suppose I can do "rpm -e pan," download from rebelbase, and re-install
> -- which seems a bother; or I can just run the .91 version. I hesitate
> there, though, because that bottom line in my .sig is meant very very
> literally (as most regulars here doubtless know); otoh, it's been out a
> long time iirc -- and either there haven't been many problems or I have
> just skipped over them.

.2.91 has been fairly stable, here.  I doubt you'll have any worse
problems than with stable .2.0.  You might have slightly /different/
problems, but not /worse/.  The thing to do would be to check out the PAN
changelog (the one on the site, by version, not the one probably in
/usr/share/docs/pan-0.14.2.91/, by date) and see what changed  -- the
bugs that were fixed, and any new features. (It has been so long I don't
remember... Taking a quick look, the manual decode option was added, and a
couple other things, plus the usual bug fixes.)  

The one thing you /might/ find worse, tho I think it was a continuing
issue from what you have, is the i18n (internationalization,
i-18-letters-n, i18n, for short) support.  If you don't venture out beyond
normally English groups, however, that's not usually a /big/ issue.  Just
watch out for the error icon in the corner, and click on it to get the PAN
log, if it shows an error.  If the log says it's choking (assertion
errors) on some unrecognizable characters, that's likely a post that PAN
won't display.  If it's a group you want to see /every/ /single/ /post/
in, you might wish to load the group in a different reader, knode or
something, perhaps.  If it's a binary group, many of us binary users have
found klibido more to our liking for binary use anyway, so I'd try it.

However, that error has been around for quite some time, I think before
0.14.2.  The changelog mentions some bug fixes for it, but they didn't
eliminate the issue, and /may/ have made it worse in /some/ cases.  So...
just watchout for it...

Other than that single caveat, which really hasn't bothered me here, and
may or may not be better or worse, but isn't fixed yet (in .2.91 anyway,
I've not tried CVS so don't have the foggiest there) that's certain, I
don't believe there's anything else I've seen to worry about.

-- 
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