From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <e@80x24.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-ASN:  
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
	shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
Received: from localhost (dcvr.yhbt.net [127.0.0.1])
	by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33FB01F45F;
	Sun,  5 May 2019 21:40:02 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sun, 5 May 2019 21:40:02 +0000
From: Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>
To: Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>
Cc: meta@public-inbox.org
Subject: Re: interop with leafnode
Message-ID: <20190505214002.eugktgp2lmg4apm2@dcvr>
References: <87tvlkbkrk.fsf@taht.net>
 <20181027001054.dd7si5aukfwxuop4@dcvr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181027001054.dd7si5aukfwxuop4@dcvr>
List-Id: <meta.public-inbox.org>

Eric Wong <e@80x24.org> wrote:
> I guess there's some bug or missing commands in public-inbox-nntpd
> which leafnode relies on.  Sorry I haven't had time to investigate
> or do much with public-inbox, lately (but maybe you could :)

I still haven't tried leafnode, but I just remembered I fixed an
NNTP bug a while back to give it compatibility with Alpine:

https://public-inbox.org/meta/20190116045802.ikm67b4cwigso3tc@dcvr/

commit d66aa534a4a7506cfc5cfab49d1e09f8db8be3dd
("nntp: header responses use CRLF consistently")

Perhaps it's the same bug you hit with leafnode?