Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

2003-05-31 Thread moseley
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 10:04:32AM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: > Not a doc bug -- that part of the documentation is immediately > created from the relevant program code. But, of course, the Debian > package may unset use_domain in the systemwide configuration file > /etc/Muttrc. That's exactly

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

2003-05-30 Thread Thomas Roessler
On 2003-05-29 14:24:38 -0700, Bill Moseley wrote: > And to follow up to my own post. Mutt 1.5.4i (2003-03-19) does > not set $use_domain yes by default. The docs say: > use_domain > Type: boolean > Default: yes > When set, Mutt will qualify all local addresses (ones without the @host > porti

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

2003-05-30 Thread Patrick Shanahan
* Bill Moseley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05-29-03 18:36]: > On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 02:39:13PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: > > > The logic for the mail-followup-to header is a little more > > complicated, and involves both subscribed and known lists. > > > > First of all, mutt will only generate a

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

2003-05-30 Thread Bill Moseley
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 01:40:51PM -0700, Bill Moseley wrote: > On a related note: I noticed that my reply had: > > Mail-Followup-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], > Debian users list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Mutt users list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" is not my address. > >

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

2003-05-30 Thread Bill Moseley
On a related note: I noticed that my reply had: Mail-Followup-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Debian users list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mutt users list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" is not my address. I didn't have $hostname set in my .muttrc so I assume it set the Mail-Followup-

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

2003-05-30 Thread Bill Moseley
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 02:39:13PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: > The logic for the mail-followup-to header is a little more > complicated, and involves both subscribed and known lists. > > First of all, mutt will only generate a mail-followup-to header if > (1) the $followup_to option is set,

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

2003-05-30 Thread Thomas Roessler
On 2003-05-25 13:23:32 -0400, Gregory Seidman wrote: > I'm trying to figure this out myself. In particular, it looks > like there might be a bug in either the documentation or (I hope) > mutt 1.4. The documentation says that the ~l pattern matches > messages to known lists (anything matched in a s