Gerfried Fuchs writes: >* William R. Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2001-12-04 11:56]: >> Because the thread originated there. > > I haven't seen it before here. Do you really mean ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and not <debian-security@LISTS.debian.org>? >Those are two totally different things.... Maybe you have to resend >your message there to let it show up in the correct list. You have my >permission to send my messages there, too. For completeness. But >please add that I don't read <debian-security@LISTS.debian.org> so if >someone answers s/he should consider to Cc: me if it seems relevant.
I accidentally sent it to @debian.org, and Colin Watson pointed that error out to me. I re-sent it to @lists.debian.org, which is where the thread belongs. Note that I removed the CC to [EMAIL PROTECTED] The similarity of those two aliases is very confusing. I am also on a number of perl.org's lists, and for that domain the correct address is @perl.org, not @lists.perl.org. I think I confused the two. >> The original idea was debian-related, in that I wanted to be able to >> have /etc/alternatives be consulted when deciding what editor to >> invoke. > > /etc/alternatives is readable by every user. If you want just to >decide there is no need to do this as root. If you want to participate in that part of the discussion I suggest you read the list archives for [EMAIL PROTECTED] --Bill. -- William R Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wards.net/~bill/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.