Well, I'm tired of this discussion. I'm also tired of downloading the
same messages over and over again. I'm unsubscribing from this
list (actually, I already did). If anybody wishes to follow up on any
topic we have touched upon, do so via e-mail.
I hope the list maintainers find a solution to th
On Dec 16, 1997, at 11:22, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Tyson Dowd:
> > A couple of us discussed this (and other problems with the mailing
> > list), in the thread "Duplicate messages on this list" in debian-devel
> > about a week ago and eventually came to a standstill where most people
> > in the di
On Dec 9, 1997, at 15:34, Matthew R. Briggs wrote:
> No, I don't think that will do it. He's talking about ntldr and boot.ini,
> which NT places in the root directory of the boot drive...in his case a
> 300MB FAT partition. If he reformats for ext2, the NT boot loader will
> not exist anymor
On Dec 9, 1997, at 00:59, Carl Mummert wrote:
> Assuming no Sender line, or Sender = From, I beleive that the following
> mapping is compliant with the standard:
>
> >From -> Sender (Sender is omitted if
> it is the same as From,
> but it's not, anymore)
>
On Dec 4, 1997, at 23:55, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Personally, I still think that reply-to is a bad solution; we
> are just pandering to broken software (decent software, like gnus,
> allows on to set mailing list parameters [look for to-address] such
> that group replies go only to t
On Dec 5, 1997, at 15:49, Tyson Dowd wrote:
> On 02-Dec-1997, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >No, please don't muck with reply-to. That's evil. And if I
> > hadn't lost my disk, I'd have a handy-dandy url for you. Hmmm. Try
> > http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.ht
On Dec 6, 1997, at 16:56, Fabrizio Polacco wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > Personally, I still think that reply-to is a bad solution;
>
> I agree.
>
> > The people with sad mail software and lazy fingers are
> > penalizing the people with low bandwidth. Don't break
On Dec 2, 1997, at 14:48, Mariusz Pagowski wrote:
> Hello,
> I learned about samba package allowing me to access disks
> on NT machine from unix/linux.
Rather the other way: you can see your linux volumes from NT (in the
\\linuxbox\path style used by SMB).
> But does samba allow me
> to log
me, because they
wouldn't help me BEFORE I download the messages via modem. I sent a
note to Greg asking him to elaborate on his points, and never got an
answer. I'm posting that note here.
On Nov 23, 1997, at 21:08, Gonzalo A. Diethelm wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> On Nov 2
9 matches
Mail list logo
