[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert upd
From: |
markj |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update |
Date: |
Wed, 20 Aug 2003 12:15:45 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4i |
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 08:22:52PM -0700, Robert Anderson wrote:
> Now, you're going to say "well that's a broken MUA problem" with respect
> to the duplicate replies. Maybe, but I'm using the default MUA on RH9
> (evolution). That doesn't seem like an outlier to me. I can't think of
> what would be more mainstream, in fact.
Evolution is acknowledged broken. There is a bug report listed on their web
site for support of mailing lists. If you are a RH customer, try asking
them to help fix it.
> I don't understand what it "breaks" about the headers.
It obstructs clients which actually follow the RFCs. That's hardly ever a
good thing.
MJR
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Robert Anderson, 2003/08/19
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Miles Bader, 2003/08/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Robert Collins, 2003/08/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Jonathan Walther, 2003/08/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Robert Collins, 2003/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Jonathan Walther, 2003/08/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Peter Conrad, 2003/08/19
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Miles Bader, 2003/08/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Robert Anderson, 2003/08/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Mark A. Flacy, 2003/08/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update,
markj <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Jonathan Walther, 2003/08/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Miles Bader, 2003/08/22
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Miles Bader, 2003/08/22
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Robert Anderson, 2003/08/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Andrew Suffield, 2003/08/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, MJ Ray, 2003/08/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Jonathan Walther, 2003/08/22
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Stig Brautaset, 2003/08/23
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, MJ Ray, 2003/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Andrew Suffield, 2003/08/25