On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 01:12:33PM +0200, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote: > * David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-07-15 05:58 -0500]: > > % > with the Message-ID: regenerated on your system, too. > > % > > % Does that mean that mutt won't be able to sort it into the correct > > % thread? > > > > I don't think the References: are tossed, but it's a new message and so > > it should get a new Message-ID: and so it changes. > > The MID header is left unchanged, mutt adds: > Resent-From: Nicolas Rachinsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 13:08:43 +0200 > Resent-Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Resent-To: Nicolas Rachinsky <nicolas>
Okay, if the Resent-To: header should have been added, something must have gone wrong. This are the headers of one of my bounced messages (bounced to [EMAIL PROTECTED]): ---------------------------- snip -------------------------- Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline X-From-Line: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 09 22:48:30 2002 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivery-date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 22:48:30 +0400 (removed tons of Received: headers) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 17:17:30 +0200 From: Dominik Vogt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: test, please ignore Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-Resent-By: Forwarder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Resent-For: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Resent-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Sender: uucp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Lines: 17 Xref: AK2614.spb.edu junk:4849 MIME-Version: 1.0 ---------------------------- snip -------------------------- No Resent-To: header anywhere. Any good explanation for taht? Bye Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Dominik Vogt, mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], phone: 0721/91374-382 Schlund + Partner AG, Erbprinzenstr. 4-12, D-76133 Karlsruhe
