Michael --
...and then Michael Sanders said...
% Is the mutt-users list still alive? I have received no post since the
% one referenced above.
Yep; it sure is.
%
% Someone please send an answer directly to me.
I don't know if you've gotten any yet, but here's one. And it's copied
to the lis
Is the mutt-users list still alive? I have received no post since the
one referenced above.
Someone please send an answer directly to me.
--
(T.) Michael Sanders internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Physics Department URL: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~sanders
University of Michigan
Mikko Hänninen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Thu, 06 Jan 2000:
> Both. The Y2K problem with 2-digit years (which are legal according to
Sorry, that went to the wrong place, when I was munging about the
recipient headers. :-( Apologies for the extra post (and this one
too).
Mikko
--
// Mikko
Sitaram Iyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Wed, 05 Jan 2000:
> I'm confused. Does mutt need fixing or does USA.NET or do both?
Both. The Y2K problem with 2-digit years (which are legal according to
the RFC, but are also pretty stupid and shouldn't be used...) has been
reported already several tim
On Sat, Jan 01, 2000 at 07:12:28PM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> Mutt as a small y2k problem on the receiving end.
[...]
> The following patch applies to the stable and unstable code branches
> and makes mutt deal properly with two-digit dates < 70.
[...]
Note that this patch probably (I'm not
