New Pan - Slackware

This is a discussion on New Pan - Slackware ; I remember some people complaining here about the new version of Pan included in Slackware 12.0. Someone said he or she was going to install the version that came with Slackware 11.0. Now that I've installed Slackware 12.0 and used ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29

Thread: New Pan

  1. New Pan

    I remember some people complaining here about the new version of Pan
    included in Slackware 12.0. Someone said he or she was going to install
    the version that came with Slackware 11.0. Now that I've installed
    Slackware 12.0 and used version 0.131 of Pan, I see why people complained
    about it. I would like to compile and install the older version of Pan,
    but I'm not having much luck, so I would like to know if any of you have
    managed to get the older version working with Slackware 12.0.

    Since there's a new version of gcc in Slackware 12.0, I didn't think it
    would be a good idea to simply install the older Pan package. I
    downloaded the source for Pan 0.14.2.91 from the Pan website and the
    Slackware 11.0 SlackBuild and other files it calls for from a Slackware
    mirror. Since the Pan website stated one dependency that wasn't already
    installed, gnet, I used the SlackBuild from slackbuilds.org to create a
    Slackware 12.0 package for it and then I installed it. However, when I
    run the Pan SlackBuild file, Pan does not configure properly and the Pan
    executable doesn't get compiled, so the resulting package is rather
    useless. I'm not a C programmer, so the resulting config.log doesn't tell
    me muc, although it looks like there are errors of different kinds, some
    with the code itself, some with non-existent files, and at least once
    where configure seems to have mistaken a parameter for a filename and then
    complains that it can't find that file. I tried running the same
    SlackBuild against the same source file under Slackware 11.0, and it ran
    fine. I didn't install the resulting package to test it, but it did
    create the Pan executable file.

    Again, I would like to know how others, if any, got the older version of
    Pan to work with Slackware 12.0. If I can't get it to work, I guess my
    "new Pan" will be something like Thunderbird or slrn. Now to see if I can
    figure out how to send out new posts with new Pan.
    --
    Chick Tower

    For e-mail: aols dot sent dot towerboy at xoxy dot net.

  2. Re: New Pan

    On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 06:05:00 +0200, Chick Tower wrote:



    > Again, I would like to know how others, if any, got the older version of
    > Pan to work with Slackware 12.0. If I can't get it to work, I guess my
    > "new Pan" will be something like Thunderbird or slrn. Now to see if I can
    > figure out how to send out new posts with new Pan.


    I'm using the package from 11.0, filename: pan-0.14.2.91-i486-2 on my
    12.0 systems, with no problems.

    --
    "Bother!" said Pooh, as Christopher Robin pleaded to be spanked again.


  3. Re: New Pan

    On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 06:05:00 +0200, Chick Tower wrote:

    > I remember some people complaining here about the new version of Pan
    > included in Slackware 12.0. Someone said he or she was going to install
    > the version that came with Slackware 11.0. Now that I've installed
    > Slackware 12.0 and used version 0.131 of Pan, I see why people complained
    > about it. I would like to compile and install the older version of Pan,
    > but I'm not having much luck, so I would like to know if any of you have
    > managed to get the older version working with Slackware 12.0.
    >
    > Since there's a new version of gcc in Slackware 12.0, I didn't think it
    > would be a good idea to simply install the older Pan package.


    ok, I don't run slack but I do run the old pan AND I have found just
    recently that the package I use - I always compile pan no matter which
    distro - will not compile any more. The solution was to delete the gcc
    link to gcc-4.1 and make one to gcc-whatever-worked-before (your distro
    should still ship the old version.

    The reason I run the old version of pan is because I heavily modified the
    source to my tastes. What is so bad about the new version of pan if you
    please?

    --
    ___ _______ ___ ___ ___ __ ____
    / _ \/ __/ _ | / _ \ / _ \/ _ |/ / / / /
    / // / _// __ |/ // / / ___/ __ / /_/ / /__
    /____/___/_/ |_/____/ /_/ /_/ |_\____/____/


  4. Re: New Pan

    On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 06:05:00 +0200, Chick Tower wrote:

    >
    > Again, I would like to know how others, if any, got the older version of
    > Pan to work with Slackware 12.0. If I can't get it to work, I guess my
    > "new Pan" will be something like Thunderbird or slrn. Now to see if I can
    > figure out how to send out new posts with new Pan.


    The new pan really sucks--the memory up. I installed the version that came
    with Slackware 11 that I compiled myself(I compiled it in Slackware 11)
    and it works fine.

    jamess

  5. Re: New Pan

    hmm, in my case new pan is by several orders of magnitude better than old
    series. using 0.132, no crashes, fast and great.


  6. Re: New Pan

    On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 09:22:38 +0000, james wrote:

    >> Again, I would like to know how others, if any, got the older version of
    >> Pan to work with Slackware 12.0. If I can't get it to work, I guess my
    >> "new Pan" will be something like Thunderbird or slrn. Now to see if I
    >> can figure out how to send out new posts with new Pan.


    > The new pan really sucks--the memory up. I installed the version that came
    > with Slackware 11 that I compiled myself(I compiled it in Slackware 11)
    > and it works fine.


    I even used the pre-compiled Slack 11 version. Just copy over the binary
    file pan.

    --
    Linux Help: http://rsgibson.com/linux.htm
    Email - rsgibson@verizon.borg
    Replace borg with net


  7. Re: New Pan

    >On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 06:05:00 +0200, Chick Tower wrote:

    > Again, I would like to know how others, if any, got the older
    > version of Pan to work with Slackware 12.0. If I can't get it to
    > work, I guess my "new Pan" will be something like Thunderbird or
    > slrn. Now to see if I can figure out how to send out new posts
    > with new Pan.


    A pan that doesn't work, still works better than slrn. Don't go
    that route, if you care about getting any respect around here.

    cordially, as always,

    rm

  8. Re: New Pan

    On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 23:33:57 -0500, Dan C wrote:

    > On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 06:05:00 +0200, Chick Tower wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >> Again, I would like to know how others, if any, got the older version
    >> of Pan to work with Slackware 12.0.

    >
    > I'm using the package from 11.0, filename: pan-0.14.2.91-i486-2 on my
    > 12.0 systems, with no problems.


    Thanks, Dan. That's useful to know.

    As a general question to everyone and anyone, is it safe or wise to run
    applications compiled with an earlier version of gcc than the OS was
    compiled with? Can we even assume that Slackware 12.0 was compiled with
    the version of gcc included with it?



    --
    Chick Tower

    For e-mail: aols . sent . towerboy AT xoxy . net

  9. Re: New Pan

    On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 09:39:07 +0100, Dead Paul wrote:

    > The reason I run the old version of pan is because I heavily modified
    > the source to my tastes. What is so bad about the new version of pan if
    > you please?


    I don't care for the way the new version works. I guess I could get used
    to it, but here's what I dislike:

    a) You can't download all new message headers and their bodies in one
    step. You have to download all new headers, "manually" select what you
    want to read, and then download the bodies of those messages. Instead of
    one step, it's now three. I would rather just download all new messages
    and let my score file separate the chaff from the wheat (or, more
    accurately, the known chaff from the assumed wheat).

    b) To perform that third step, Cache Articles, there is no associated
    keystroke. You must go through the menu, which I find annoying.

    c) I copied over my old score file. While Pan doesn't complain about the
    existing rules, it seems to just ignore them. I see that the new rule
    format is a little different, streamlined. Additionally, who knows if the
    cleanscore Perl script (found at the slrn website) will still work
    properly?

    d) You can still have multiple news servers, designated as primary and
    fallback, but all the messages are aggregated together by newsgroup. I
    would rather set up multiple servers and download the message bodies from
    only one, and headers only from the rest, so that if the "primary" server
    is down my headers are up-to-date on the others and I can still get
    message bodies without wading through old stuff. As I suppose it is now,
    if the designated primary server doesn't answer up in a timely manner (as
    defined by the Pan programmers, not me), the fallback server(s) are
    contacted. Servers are sometimes slow to respond, but eventually do, in
    my experience.

    e) There is no longer a "send later" option for posts, so it appears you
    have to be on-line to reply to anything. (Aw, hell, I wish I had
    remembered this before I began this reply.) I would rather do as much as
    possible off-line, connect, and exchange messages en masse. Perhaps we
    have to learn to save things as drafts, connect, and then bring them back
    into a posting one at a time.

    There is one thing I like about the new version. It allows us to specify
    a mail reader (as Pan calls it). I would hope it can be used to send
    mail, too. Nope, apparently not. It pops up the Post Article form with
    the MailTo line completed, not my specified mail client's Compose form. I
    see no way to configure a mail server for e-mail replies or forwarding; in
    fact, there's no longer a way to forward messages via e-mail. What Pan
    will do with e-mail but no e-mail server to send it through is the obvious
    question. I guess there's isn't one thing I like better about the new
    version. I seriously, non-sarcastically, thought there was when I began
    this paragraph, until I tested this feature. Now I guess I've found a
    feature that doesn't work, since I see no way to tell Pan what mail server
    to use.

    Most features have remained the same, at least as presented to users. I
    suspect there has been a lot of work on Pan to make it better "under the
    hood". Perhaps I'm just being fussy or petty, but it feels to me as
    though this new version of Pan has been slightly "dumbed down" or
    simplified, with an accompanying slight loss of control. Unfortunately, I
    want to control those very things.



    --
    Chick Tower

    For e-mail: aols . sent . towerboy AT xoxy . net

  10. Re: New Pan

    Chick Tower says:

    >Thanks, Dan. That's useful to know.


    Dan is our resident troll. We don't want to see what he says so we
    ask that you confine your correspondence with him to emal.

    >As a general question to everyone and anyone, is it safe or wise to
    >run applications compiled with an earlier version of gcc than the
    >OS was compiled with? Can we even assume that Slackware 12.0 was
    >compiled with the version of gcc included with it?


    There is no general answer.

    cordially, as always,

    rm

  11. Re: New Pan

    >On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 09:39:07 +0100, Dead Paul wrote:

    >> The reason I run the old version of pan is because I heavily
    >> modified the source to my tastes. What is so bad about the new
    >> version of pan if you please?


    Added a few comments here and there, huh?

    Why don't you upload your version for us all to try?

    cordially, as always,

    rm

  12. Re: New Pan

    On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 21:48:22 +0200, Chick Tower wrote:

    > On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 23:33:57 -0500, Dan C wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 06:05:00 +0200, Chick Tower wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> Again, I would like to know how others, if any, got the older version
    >>> of Pan to work with Slackware 12.0.

    >>
    >> I'm using the package from 11.0, filename: pan-0.14.2.91-i486-2 on my
    >> 12.0 systems, with no problems.

    >
    > Thanks, Dan. That's useful to know.
    >
    > As a general question to everyone and anyone, is it safe or wise to run
    > applications compiled with an earlier version of gcc than the OS was
    > compiled with?


    As long as the gcc version on your target app is LOWER, chances are it
    might work. Note the disclaimers. However, installing a slackware package
    intended for an earlier version on a different slackware version could
    lead to unintended errors or problems, libraries aside.

    > Can we even assume that Slackware 12.0 was compiled with
    > the version of gcc included with it?


    Yes, I think that is a very safe assumption.

    As a rule of thumb, if you change your compiler and libc, then all
    applications should be recompiled. However, there's a workaround for using
    an earlier gcc in one of the READMEs.

    --
    Peter

  13. Re: New Pan

    Chick Tower wrote:
    > On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 23:33:57 -0500, Dan C wrote:
    >> On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 06:05:00 +0200, Chick Tower wrote:
    >>> Again, I would like to know how others, if any, got the older version
    >>> of Pan to work with Slackware 12.0.

    >> I'm using the package from 11.0, filename: pan-0.14.2.91-i486-2 on my
    >> 12.0 systems, with no problems.

    >
    > As a general question to everyone and anyone, is it safe or wise to run
    > applications compiled with an earlier version of gcc than the OS was
    > compiled with? Can we even assume that Slackware 12.0 was compiled with
    > the version of gcc included with it?


    The GCC ABI (how function calls are made, sizes of standard objects,
    etc.) has been quite stable lately, so changing between recent GCC
    versions shouldn't affect most applications. The libraries and kernel
    interface are a different story...

    - Daniel

  14. Re: New Pan

    On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 21:48:23 +0200, Chick Tower wrote:

    > On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 09:39:07 +0100, Dead Paul wrote:
    >
    >> The reason I run the old version of pan is because I heavily modified
    >> the source to my tastes. What is so bad about the new version of pan if
    >> you please?

    >
    > I don't care for the way the new version works. I guess I could get used
    > to it, but here's what I dislike:
    >
    > a) You can't download all new message headers and their bodies in one
    > step. You have to download all new headers, "manually" select what you
    > want to read, and then download the bodies of those messages. Instead of
    > one step, it's now three. I would rather just download all new messages
    > and let my score file separate the chaff from the wheat (or, more
    > accurately, the known chaff from the assumed wheat).
    >
    > b) To perform that third step, Cache Articles, there is no associated
    > keystroke. You must go through the menu, which I find annoying.
    >
    > c) I copied over my old score file. While Pan doesn't complain about the
    > existing rules, it seems to just ignore them. I see that the new rule
    > format is a little different, streamlined. Additionally, who knows if the
    > cleanscore Perl script (found at the slrn website) will still work
    > properly?
    >
    > d) You can still have multiple news servers, designated as primary and
    > fallback, but all the messages are aggregated together by newsgroup. I
    > would rather set up multiple servers and download the message bodies from
    > only one, and headers only from the rest, so that if the "primary" server
    > is down my headers are up-to-date on the others and I can still get
    > message bodies without wading through old stuff. As I suppose it is now,
    > if the designated primary server doesn't answer up in a timely manner (as
    > defined by the Pan programmers, not me), the fallback server(s) are
    > contacted. Servers are sometimes slow to respond, but eventually do, in
    > my experience.
    >
    > e) There is no longer a "send later" option for posts, so it appears you
    > have to be on-line to reply to anything. (Aw, hell, I wish I had
    > remembered this before I began this reply.) I would rather do as much as
    > possible off-line, connect, and exchange messages en masse. Perhaps we
    > have to learn to save things as drafts, connect, and then bring them back
    > into a posting one at a time.


    Bummer!

    >
    > There is one thing I like about the new version. It allows us to specify
    > a mail reader (as Pan calls it). I would hope it can be used to send
    > mail, too. Nope, apparently not. It pops up the Post Article form with
    > the MailTo line completed, not my specified mail client's Compose form. I
    > see no way to configure a mail server for e-mail replies or forwarding; in
    > fact, there's no longer a way to forward messages via e-mail. What Pan
    > will do with e-mail but no e-mail server to send it through is the obvious
    > question. I guess there's isn't one thing I like better about the new
    > version. I seriously, non-sarcastically, thought there was when I began
    > this paragraph, until I tested this feature. Now I guess I've found a
    > feature that doesn't work, since I see no way to tell Pan what mail server
    > to use.
    >
    > Most features have remained the same, at least as presented to users. I
    > suspect there has been a lot of work on Pan to make it better "under the
    > hood".


    Nah, the new features don't seem so good to me. And as for "a lot of work
    done under the hood" I wonder what kind? I hacked my version of pan
    (0.14.2.91) explicitly in order to disable most of the GNKSA enforcement
    rudeness. I prefer to decide myself how many ng's I will post to and what
    percentage of a message may be quoted etc.

    > Perhaps I'm just being fussy or petty, but it feels to me as
    > though this new version of Pan has been slightly "dumbed down" or
    > simplified, with an accompanying slight loss of control. Unfortunately, I
    > want to control those very things.


    Yeah, most brilliant things turn bad or go insane.

    Thanks.

    --
    ___ _______ ___ ___ ___ __ ____
    / _ \/ __/ _ | / _ \ / _ \/ _ |/ / / / /
    / // / _// __ |/ // / / ___/ __ / /_/ / /__
    /____/___/_/ |_/____/ /_/ /_/ |_\____/____/


  15. Re: New Pan

    On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:55:05 +0000, Mad-Eye Moody wrote:

    > hmm, in my case new pan is by several orders of magnitude better than old
    > series. using 0.132, no crashes, fast and great.



    I use 0.14.2.91 and it doesn't crash. I also stripped out the GKNSA
    crap/rudeness and it still works fine.

    --
    ___ _______ ___ ___ ___ __ ____
    / _ \/ __/ _ | / _ \ / _ \/ _ |/ / / / /
    / // / _// __ |/ // / / ___/ __ / /_/ / /__
    /____/___/_/ |_/____/ /_/ /_/ |_\____/____/


  16. Re: New Pan

    On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 23:33:57 -0500, Dan C wrote:

    > On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 06:05:00 +0200, Chick Tower wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >> Again, I would like to know how others, if any, got the older version of
    >> Pan to work with Slackware 12.0. If I can't get it to work, I guess my
    >> "new Pan" will be something like Thunderbird or slrn. Now to see if I can
    >> figure out how to send out new posts with new Pan.

    >
    > I'm using the package from 11.0, filename: pan-0.14.2.91-i486-2 on my
    > 12.0 systems, with no problems.
    >

    FYI: I have this information for anyone wanting to compile Pan using the
    source and SlackBuild from 11.0 using the the tools provided by 12.0.
    This worked for me, using the toolset and libraries provided by a
    generic Slackware 12.0 box. YMMV. The binary from 11.0 may be just fine
    also.

    1. Compile and install the gnet package from Slack 11.0 (source/l/gnet).
    This worked out of the box.

    2. Compile and install the _patched_ Pan sources from 11.0 (source/xap/pan)

    There is one file in the source which needs to be patched. I found this
    patch here:
    http://ftp.riken.go.jp \
    /pub/Linux/gentoo/net-nntp/pan/files/pan-0.14.2.91-gcc4-2.patch

    The file, pan-0.14.2.91/pan/base/msort.c, needs some changes to some
    pointer arithmetic. Without the patch, the compile will fail.

    The rest is per the standard drill for working with patched sources:
    expand the source, apply the patch, and recompress (noting the patch in
    the name.) Update the SlackBuild script (noting your patche in the name),
    build the package, install the package.

    --
    Douglas Mayne

  17. Re: New Pan

    Mad-Eye Moody wrote:

    > hmm, in my case new pan is by several orders of magnitude better than old
    > series. using 0.132, no crashes, fast and great.


    Three things I did after installing Slackware 12, was to remove new Pan,
    Install older version of Pan and installed xmms. I had a hard time
    searching for messages or groups using search bar in New Pan.

  18. Re: New Pan

    Dead Paul wrote:

    > What is so bad about the new version of pan if you
    > please?
    >


    I had a hard time searching for messages or groups using search bar in New
    Pan.

  19. Re: New Pan

    On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 09:05:48 -0600, Douglas Mayne wrote:

    > 2. Compile and install the _patched_ Pan sources from 11.0
    > (source/xap/pan)
    >
    > There is one file in the source which needs to be patched. I found this
    > patch here:
    > http://ftp.riken.go.jp \
    > /pub/Linux/gentoo/net-nntp/pan/files/pan-0.14.2.91-gcc4-2.patch


    Thanks, Douglas. How were you able to find this patch?

    --
    Chick Tower

    For e-mail: aols . sent . towerboy AT xoxy . net


  20. Re: New Pan

    On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:56:45 -0500, SuperDaemon wrote:

    >> hmm, in my case new pan is by several orders of magnitude better than
    >> old series. using 0.132, no crashes, fast and great.


    > Three things I did after installing Slackware 12, was to remove new Pan,
    > Install older version of Pan and installed xmms. I had a hard time
    > searching for messages or groups using search bar in New Pan.


    BTW, I'm with you guys on the "New Pan Sucks" bandwagon.

    You mention XMMS...My Slack 12 is still in the "ongoing project" mode on
    a spare partition.

    Thing I like about XMMS is the layout and size mainly but it also has
    features I like - The equalizer, search function and separate playlist
    window.

    When I set it up using the "Double Size" option that and aumix all fit
    nicely on desktop #1 which is dedicated to music and audio control.

    Does anyone have a suggestion for a replacement that has roughly the
    same size and layout? The others I've tried (all the usual suspects
    included with KDE and Slack) are too big, too small or missing features.

    I know there are several players but I want one for which the size and
    layout are my main desired features.

    --
    Linux Help: http://rsgibson.com/linux.htm
    Email - rsgibson@verizon.borg
    Replace borg with net


+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast