On Sat, Nov 03, 2001 at 10:58:07PM -0500, Rich Lafferty wrote: > I have a theory as to what happened with that message I sent that was > delivered to the list with another message, containing sircam, > dangling off the end. > I just sent a reply to Lars's post about that message, in that thread, > and immediately got back a "queued for moderator approval" > message. I'm subscribed as <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, but I had sent > both the corrupted message and that reply to Lars from > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
Sounds likely. > So, my message would have landed in Steve's moderator mailbox. Part of > his mail system reacted poorly to the control characters in the > message following and didn't separate it out as a separate > message. When Steve went to hand-approve the message, he used mutt, > which we've found doesn't show the corrupted bits on the end. Qmail into mbox and mutt ... then piped to majordomo's approve mechanism. > If Steve uses mbox, then it's pretty easy to figure out where the > problem might have originated, because that's a particularly mbox-ish > sort of corruption. > (And just think, if that other message didn't have sircam, we might > never have found out that there was a problem.) Could be, as list-owner get a lot of sircam junk ... Steve -- NetTek Ltd tel +44-(0)20 7483 1169 fax +44-(0)20 7483 2455 Flat 2, 43 Howitt Road, Belsize Park, London NW3 4LU mobile 07775 755503 Epage [EMAIL PROTECTED] [body only]
