[Pan-users] Re: Can post, but cannot reply (Duncan)

[Karl Lindholm]

--- On Tue, 10/28/08, address@hidden <address@hidden> wrote:

> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: 1. Re: Can post, but cannot reply (Duncan)
> (Duncan)

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:38:35 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Duncan <address@hidden>
> Subject: [Pan-users] Re: 1. Re: Can post, but cannot reply
> (Duncan)
> To: address@hidden
> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Karl Lindholm <address@hidden>
> posted address@hidden,
> excerpted below, on
> Tue, 28 Oct 2008 06:35:59 -0700:
>
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> > 1. Re: Can post, but cannot reply (Duncan)

> > Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 20:56:52 +0000 (UTC)
> > From: Duncan

> I don't see
> ALPA or airline
> (it'd probably be under org),

> Just thought you might be interested if you're already
> trying to get ALPA
> working like that.


No, it's run by the Airline Pilot's Association (ALPA), strictly for members of the ALPA.  It is not hosted by any other service.
 
> There are indeed a
> number of server
> > problems, but this is the one that makes the least
> sense - given I *can*
> > post
>
> Indeed. That's just weird.

At least I am not the only one that thinks so.


> The gentleman I mentioned using Pan
> can and does post
> > replies and is one of the moderators. I do know he
> has complained that
> > any post done from a newsreader has to be approved
> individually by him
> > or another moderator, while the replies via the web,
> or e-mail do not.
> > ALPA is aware of this, but seems disinterested in
> fixing it.
>
> So the group is effectively moderated? That's a rather
> different
> dynamic, and indeed, it's not unusual at all for the
> config for moderated
> groups to be rather messed up on a news server.

AFAIK, his moderating duties are limited to removing/editing posts not in compliance with the list rules and of course approving posts that come from newsreaders, *including his own*.  He *can* post replies, but the server is badly setup and *any* post/reply that comes from a reader must be approved, not the case with an e-mail or web post/reply.  So I am not sure what you mean by "effectively moderated". 

> Now
> knowing it's
> moderated, I'd almost lay money on it being a server
> side issue. I'm
> guessing what that other individual did to fix the problem
> was become a
> moderator, therefore bypassing rather than really fixing
> the problem.

He was a moderator before he began using a reader, so no, he did not become one to get around a problem.  He also had troubles initially in replying, but changed a setting in Pan when he first set it up allowing him to do so.  It has been long enough however that he cannot recall just what he did.  I am sure he did not expect a request for help to get it working, so he did not make note of it.

>
> The deal is that for moderated newsgroups, the server
> accepts the posts,
> then forwards it (normally by mail) to the configured
> moderator address
> for approval. If they approve it, they then post it, along
> with an
> appropriate approved header.

Perhaps I did not state this clearly enough.  For the moment, forget that once the reply gets to the server from a reader it must then be approved.  My replies never make it that far!  They never get sent to the server at all, the "posting" window and progress bar pop up and never goes away.  There is never anything for a moderator to do with my replies as he never sees them.

> In this case, presumably there's only a few
> groups/lists, or maybe just
> the one.

Actually, for our airline "sub-group" alone there are 48.  Other carriers have similar numbers, as well as the group wide forums.  Overall there are several hundred, perhaps over 1,000.

> > Pan does not display threads like I would expect or
> prefer, but that'll
> > be the subject of another post. I'll try to get
> the error messages in
> > more detail as described above first.
>
> In general or just for this group?

In general, but again, let's take one problem at a time.  I want to fix the reply problem first, and not get off on a tangent about what I find to be an annoyance rather than fix a much bigger problem.

> > I run Ubuntu 8.04 - the repositories have 0.132 as the
> available
> > version, so it is likely new enough to not be what you
> describe above.
>
> Yes, it's new enough.
>
>Just take a look in the package changelog
> and verify that
> it mentions a security patch,

First entry in the changelog is:

0.132 "Waxed in Black"
 441859 in 0.131, 'read next unread' didn't always work (Artur Jachacy)
 456730 Text before signature delimiter is doubled (Alexander Skwar)
 444184 0.131 fails to build on RH4/CentOS4 (Steven Ellis)
 438021 can't post one message to multiple groups at one time (Keith)
 355041 Two-segment group name abbreviations (Benjamin Esham)
 447680 handle nzb files whose parts are in the wrong order (Benjamin Charron)
 349490 better info for the tool-tip of the Tasks button (Douglas Bollinger)
 456519 Dependency on gmime version should be 2.1.9, not 2.1.0 (Gregory Lee)

Does not specifically mention a security patch that I can see, but obviously you can read this better than I.
 
> (If you can confirm they DID update it, it'd be
> appreciated,

It does not appear so, but again, you can read the logs better than I.

> Hopefully 8.10 has 0.133 and I'll not have to worry
> about it.)

We'll find out very soon, due out today.

Running simply "Pan" from a terminal does not display any errors.  Running it and attempting to reply with the --debug switch gives a bunch.  Was not able to redirect output, so don't know where in this it starts, but since it repeats, this is the entire error I get, though perhaps not in order (I replaced user name and password with "*"'s, and my skype ID with "skype address".).

[From: Karl Lindholm <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: Polar NOV bid
Newsgroups: aai.Polar
References:
User-Agent: Pan/0.132 (Waxed in Black)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:38:51 -0400, THOMAS          HOLMAN wrote:

> Yep, I posted it via the newreader.

Attempting reply to trace errors with Pan.


--
address@hidden
(skype address)

Notice: My lawyer can beat up your lawyer.
.
]; status was 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0x7f0f4c002640 calling set_watch_mode 0; _channel is 0x7f0f4c0027c0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:532:set_watch_mode) channel 0x7f0f4c0027c0 setting mode read
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 0: _tag_watch is now 2267
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xf9b220, channel 0x123c820, cond 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(nntp.cc:323:write_next_command) nntp 0x1246600 writing to socket 0xf9b220 on server 1 this command: [AUTHINFO USER ********
]
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 1; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:540:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode write
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 1: _tag_watch is now 2269
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xf9b220, channel 0x123c820, cond 4
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:436:do_write) socket 0xf9b220 channel 0x123c820 maybe wrote [AUTHINFO USER ********
]; status was 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 0; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:532:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode read
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 0: _tag_watch is now 2271
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0x7f0f4c002640, channel 0x7f0f4c0027c0, cond 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0x7f0f4c002640 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0x7f0f4c0027c0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0x7f0f4c0027c0 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(nntp.cc:105:fire_done_func) I (0x1249aa0) am setting my _listener to 0
(task.cc:50:check_in) task 0xf81820 returning nntp 0x1249aa0
(task.cc:57:check_in) returned nntp 0x1249aa0 OK; task 0xf81820 now has 0 nntps
(nntp-pool.cc:114:check_in) nntp 0x1249aa0 is being checked in, health is 1
(queue.cc:222:process_task) in process_task with a task of type POST
(nntp-pool.cc:265:request_nntp) trying to create a socket
(socket-impl-gio.cc:302:GIOChannelSocket) GIOChannelSocket ctor 0xfae390
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xf9b220, channel 0x123c820, cond 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 1; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:540:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode write
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 1: _tag_watch is now 2273
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xf9b220, channel 0x123c820, cond 4
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:436:do_write) socket 0xf9b220 channel 0x123c820 maybe wrote [AUTHINFO PASS *****
]; status was 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 0; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:532:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode read
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 0: _tag_watch is now 2275
(nntp.cc:323:write_next_command) nntp 0xd2bc30 writing to socket 0xfae390 on server 1 this command: []
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xfae390 calling set_watch_mode 1; _channel is 0xfa7090
(socket-impl-gio.cc:540:set_watch_mode) channel 0xfa7090 setting mode write
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 1: _tag_watch is now 2278
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xfae390, channel 0xfa7090, cond 4
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xfae390 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0xfa7090
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0xfa7090 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:436:do_write) socket 0xfae390 channel 0xfa7090 maybe wrote []; status was 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xfae390 calling set_watch_mode 0; _channel is 0xfa7090
(socket-impl-gio.cc:532:set_watch_mode) channel 0xfa7090 setting mode read
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 0: _tag_watch is now 2280
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xf9b220, channel 0x123c820, cond 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(nntp.cc:323:write_next_command) nntp 0x1246600 writing to socket 0xf9b220 on server 1 this command: [MODE READER
]
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 1; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:540:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode write
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 1: _tag_watch is now 2284
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xf9b220, channel 0x123c820, cond 4
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:436:do_write) socket 0xf9b220 channel 0x123c820 maybe wrote [MODE READER
]; status was 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 0; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:532:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode read
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 0: _tag_watch is now 2286
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xfae390, channel 0xfa7090, cond 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xfae390 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0xfa7090
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0xfa7090 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(nntp.cc:323:write_next_command) nntp 0xd2bc30 writing to socket 0xfae390 on server 1 this command: [AUTHINFO USER ********
]
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xfae390 calling set_watch_mode 1; _channel is 0xfa7090
(socket-impl-gio.cc:540:set_watch_mode) channel 0xfa7090 setting mode write
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 1: _tag_watch is now 2288
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xfae390, channel 0xfa7090, cond 4
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xfae390 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0xfa7090
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0xfa7090 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:436:do_write) socket 0xfae390 channel 0xfa7090 maybe wrote [AUTHINFO USER ********
]; status was 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xfae390 calling set_watch_mode 0; _channel is 0xfa7090
(socket-impl-gio.cc:532:set_watch_mode) channel 0xfa7090 setting mode read
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 0: _tag_watch is now 2290
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xf9b220, channel 0x123c820, cond 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(nntp.cc:105:fire_done_func) I (0x1246600) am setting my _listener to 0
(nntp-pool.cc:176:on_nntp_done) NNTP_Pool: on_nntp_done()
(nntp-pool.cc:224:on_nntp_done) success with handshake to 1, nntp 0x1246600
(queue.cc:222:process_task) in process_task with a task of type POST
(nntp-pool.cc:103:check_out) nntp 0x1246600 is now checked out
(task.cc:43:give_nntp) gave nntp 1 (0x1246600) to task 0xf81820, which now has 1 nntps
(nntp.cc:323:write_next_command) nntp 0x1246600 writing to socket 0xf9b220 on server 1 this command: [POST
]
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 1; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:540:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode write
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 1: _tag_watch is now 2294
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xf9b220, channel 0x123c820, cond 4
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:436:do_write) socket 0xf9b220 channel 0x123c820 maybe wrote [POST
]; status was 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 0; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:532:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode read
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 0: _tag_watch is now 2296
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xfae390, channel 0xfa7090, cond 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xfae390 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0xfa7090
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0xfa7090 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xfae390 calling set_watch_mode 1; _channel is 0xfa7090
(socket-impl-gio.cc:540:set_watch_mode) channel 0xfa7090 setting mode write
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 1: _tag_watch is now 2298
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xfae390, channel 0xfa7090, cond 4
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xfae390 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0xfa7090
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0xfa7090 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:436:do_write) socket 0xfae390 channel 0xfa7090 maybe wrote [AUTHINFO PASS *****
]; status was 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xfae390 calling set_watch_mode 0; _channel is 0xfa7090
(socket-impl-gio.cc:532:set_watch_mode) channel 0xfa7090 setting mode read
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 0: _tag_watch is now 2300
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xf9b220, channel 0x123c820, cond 1
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 1; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:540:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode write
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 1: _tag_watch is now 2302
(socket-impl-gio.cc:487:gio_func) gio_func: sock 0xf9b220, channel 0x123c820, cond 4
(socket-impl-gio.cc:519:set_watch_mode) socket 0xf9b220 calling set_watch_mode 2; _channel is 0x123c820
(socket-impl-gio.cc:528:set_watch_mode) channel 0x123c820 setting mode **IGNORE**
(socket-impl-gio.cc:548:set_watch_mode) set_watch_mode 2: _tag_watch is now 0
(socket-impl-gio.cc:436:do_write) socket 0xf9b220 channel 0x123c820 maybe wrote [From: Karl Lindholm <address@hidden>

*****************