On 2011/08/11 18:39, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 14:40 -0700, jdow wrote:
>>> KB_DATE_CONTAINS_TAB is misfiring with great consistency on the LKML.
>>> This is not good.
It's a known issue. There is at least one ISP and LKML rewriting *MUA*
gene
On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 14:40 -0700, jdow wrote:
> > > KB_DATE_CONTAINS_TAB is misfiring with great consistency on the LKML.
> > > This is not good.
It's a known issue. There is at least one ISP and LKML rewriting *MUA*
generated headers like that. Frankly, *this* is not good
On 2011/08/11 14:28, Axb wrote:
On 2011-08-11 23:21, jdow wrote:
KB_DATE_CONTAINS_TAB is misfiring with great consistency on the LKML.
This is not good.
{^_^}
what MLM is doing that?
The one the LKML uses, of course. {O,o}
I am not sure if that is the MLM's fault or the user
On 2011-08-11 23:21, jdow wrote:
KB_DATE_CONTAINS_TAB is misfiring with great consistency on the LKML.
This is not good.
{^_^}
what MLM is doing that?
PS: shouldn't you be on a well deserved vacation? .-)
KB_DATE_CONTAINS_TAB is misfiring with great consistency on the LKML.
This is not good.
{^_^}
