Problems Listing Users

[Jim Jarvie]

I'm somewhat embarrassed to say no - your suggestion is a very obvious way 
to test the theory.  I was so keen to try to fix that I forgot a more basic 
step and only tried numbers > 50 !

I'll make the change to 10 and test to see if I still get 2 blocks and a 
total of 20 now...

Thanks for your suggestion - I'll report back with my results.

Jim

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 18/10/01, 14:47:24, Jean Francois Micouleau 
<Jean-Francois.Micouleau at dalalu.fr> wrote regarding Re: Problems Listing Users:


> On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Jim Jarvie wrote:

> > Yes, I found [and changed] that entry [by recompiling] - what I got then
> > was a complete failure to list the users at all (I tried various
> > values).. Since the 100 users is exactly two blocks of 50 I though I
> > could change this to 1000 and my problem would be solved, but it made
> > things a lot worse !  I could only get it to work [i.e. To show any
> > users] by reverting to 50, which put me back exactly where I started...

> Did you try changing to say 10 to check if you only get 20 users in the
> list ?

> I don't think the value of 50 is the problem, it's somewhere else. In the
> second and next packet we probably don't upgrade correctly an index.

>       J.F.