From alsa-user-owner@alsa.jcu.cz  Wed Nov 11 08:24:23 1998
Received: from lbscissors.kek.jp (root@lbscissors.kek.jp [130.87.218.173])
	by marvin.jcu.cz (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA11377
	for <alsa-user@jcu.cz>; Wed, 11 Nov 1998 08:23:06 +0100
Received: from lbscissors.kek.jp (really [127.0.0.1]) by lbscissors.kek.jp
	via in.smtpd with esmtp (ident sharkey using rfc1413)
	id <m0zdUJX-0016jXC@lbscissors.kek.jp> (Debian Smail3.2.0.101)
	for <alsa-user@jcu.cz>; Wed, 11 Nov 1998 16:03:39 +0900 (JST) 
Message-Id: <m0zdUJX-0016jXC@lbscissors.kek.jp>
To: alsa-user@jcu.cz
From: sharkey@ale.physics.sunysb.edu
Subject: Re: Sorry for writing twice (was: /dev/audio-support) 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 11 Nov 1998 05:02:00 +0100."
             <19981111050200.A8753@skynet> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 16:03:38 +0900
Reply-To: alsa-user@alsa.jcu.cz
Sender: alsa-user-owner@alsa.jcu.cz
Precedence: list

> Sorry for writing the same mail twice. I thought the first eMail-adress
> was wrong, because I didn't get an immidiate response like I was used to
> from most MLs.

Yeah, what's up with this?  I've been wondering about this for months.  Why
do the alsa lists have such a high latency?  It seems to take an hour or two
just to get messages propagated, and yet your web server and FTP site seem
well connected to the net.

It's not a major problem, but if I want to answer a post, it's nice to know
that an answer wasn't already sent by someone else an hour ago, but hasn't
reached me yet.

Eric


