[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It has been fixed. I was just grousing that the fix has been in CVS for
a couple years but not in the Redhat distributions.
Rather than grouse, switch to Debian GNU/Linux: nmh 1.0.4+dev-20010317-1
But grousing is so much more fun! :)
I guess I'll have to be
Is there any reason that 1.1-RC1 hasn't been promoted to a real 1.1?
Mostly, because I'm a lame-ass.
soon. I promise. There have been a few bugs (and patches) posted.
Every time I get a new Redhat installation, I need to update inc 1.0.4
because it doesn't properly handle POP passwords
Every time I get a new Redhat installation, I need to update inc 1.0.4
because it doesn't properly handle POP passwords (without a .netrc file).
It would be nice if the released nmh didn't have this bug (which is
arguably a bug in glibc ruserpass which they refuse to fix).
So, are you
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It has been fixed. I was just grousing that the fix has been in CVS for
a couple years but not in the Redhat distributions.
Rather than grouse, switch to Debian GNU/Linux: nmh 1.0.4+dev-20010317-1
--
Bill Wohler [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.newt.com/wohler/ GnuPG
Ken Hornstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Everyone,
I've created a nmh 1.1 release canidate. You can get it from:
http://savannah.gnu.org/download/nmh/nmh-1.1-RC1.tar.gz
What's the difference between this release and the one I picked (and have
been using since then) in July?
Glenn Burkhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ken Hornstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Everyone,
I've created a nmh 1.1 release canidate. You can get it from:
http://savannah.gnu.org/download/nmh/nmh-1.1-RC1.tar.gz
What's the difference between this release and the one I picked
Scott Lipcon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think release candidates belong in the ports collection. 1.1rc1
should be relatively stable, but it hasn't been tested much at this point.
Development has gone very slowly.If there is enough demand, I'd consider
making a second port,
Ken Hornstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Everyone,
I've created a nmh 1.1 release canidate. You can get it from:
http://savannah.gnu.org/download/nmh/nmh-1.1-RC1.tar.gz
Well...yesterday I sent a message from a different email address that I
imagine the list owner might be reading about now
On Mon, 08 Jul 2002 15:03:37 -0500
Earl Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On July 8, 2002 at 18:13, Christophe Prevotaux wrote:
That's more of a protocol issue. It's not easy to do that within the
context of POP. It _is_ possible just to get the headers within POP
and I suppose
Something I need to put in is having inc delete messages after X many
have been downloaded. That way I can survive a net outages or ^C easier.
] ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine. | firewalls [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON|net
Something I need to put in is having inc delete messages after X many
have been downloaded. That way I can survive a net outages or ^C easier.
You mean via POP? It deletes each message right after it retrieves it,
AFAIK. I think that problem is that according to the POP3 spec, unless you
get
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Ken == Ken Hornstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Something I need to put in is having inc delete messages after X many
have been downloaded. That way I can survive a net outages or ^C easier.
Ken You mean via POP? It deletes each message right
Ken You mean via POP? It deletes each message right after it retrieves
Ken it,
Ken AFAIK. I think that problem is that according to the POP3 spec,
Ken unless you
Ken get a clean QUIT, you don't make any changes to the mailbox.
Hmm. That's probably what I experience.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Ken == Ken Hornstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ken You mean via POP? It deletes each message right after it retrieves
Ken it,
Ken AFAIK. I think that problem is that according to the POP3 spec,
Ken unless you
Ken get a clean QUIT, you
Shouldn't this be 1.5? Otherwise, you'll get folks confused. I seem to
recall that the last official nmh release was 1.4
Last release was 1.0.4, not 1.4. So I think 1.1 is right.
--Ken
Hi,
I was wondering if you could list the features and new features (or reintegrated ones)
of the 1.1 RC please
--
--
===
Christophe Prevotaux Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HEXANET SARLURL: http://www.hexanet.fr/
Z.A.C
I was wondering if you could list the features and new features (or
reintegrated ones)
of the 1.1 RC please
In short:
- A bunch of new shit
- A bunch of bug fixes
But seriously ... that's a good question. I haven't had time to come up
with a set of release notes. The one new feature I know
I had hoped to see APOP in this list among other things
and the ability to download only headers of messages in order
to be able to delete only the message that we don't want (AntiSPAM
like , well it is more like anti download huges unwanted files )
On Mon, 08 Jul 2002 11:21:25 -0400
Ken
I had hoped to see APOP in this list among other things
Well ... shoot. I was under the impression that APOP is on it's way out
to be replaced by the CRAM-MD5 mechanism that SASL uses. But I just
checked, and it seems like you can enable APOP already with --enable-apop.
So that's a non-issue,
On July 8, 2002 at 18:13, Christophe Prevotaux wrote:
That's more of a protocol issue. It's not easy to do that within the
context of POP. It _is_ possible just to get the headers within POP
and I suppose inc could be changed to just retrieve the headers and
make some sort of
On July 8, 2002 at 13:31, Ken Hornstein wrote:
I believe the Spam filters that use POP3 simply download the whole message
then make a decision, so that's not what you want.
I believe I saw a project (Mailfilter?) listed on freshmeat that
would work just with the headers. There are quite a
[In a message on Mon, 08 Jul 2002 15:03:37 CDT,
the pithy ruminations of Earl Hood were:]
On July 8, 2002 at 18:13, Christophe Prevotaux wrote:
That's more of a protocol issue. It's not easy to do that within the
context of POP. It _is_ possible just to get the headers within POP
On July 8, 2002 at 11:21, Ken Hornstein wrote:
But seriously ... that's a good question. I haven't had time to come up
with a set of release notes. The one new feature I know about (because
I worked on it) is SASL support for POP and SMTP, so inc and comp can
use SASL to authenticate to
On July 8, 2002 at 11:05, Jon Steinhart wrote:
And I agree, downloading the entire message is the way to go. Most spam is
very small compared to even slow V90 speeds which is what I'm stuck with out
in the country here, so it's no big deal.
Well, I would have to disagree about spam
24 matches
Mail list logo
