nmh-workers  

Messages by Thread

• • Re: [nmh-workers] Reproducible build patch Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Reproducible build patch Robert Elz
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Reproducible build patch Robert Elz
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Reproducible build patch Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Reproducible build patch Robert Elz
• [nmh-workers] How big a message should I accept? norm
  • Re: [nmh-workers] How big a message should I accept? Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] How big a message should I accept? Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] How big a message should I accept? David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] How big a message should I accept? David Malone
  • Re: [nmh-workers] How big a message should I accept? Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] How big a message should I accept? David Malone
  • Re: [nmh-workers] How big a message should I accept? Ken Hornstein
• [nmh-workers] Killing Content-MD5 support Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Killing Content-MD5 support David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Killing Content-MD5 support Ken Hornstein
• [nmh-workers] Problem With inc Not Sending Passwords After Upgrade To 1.7.1 Darren Provine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Problem With inc Not Sending Passwords After Upgrade To 1.7.1 Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Problem With inc Not Sending Passwords After Upgrade To 1.7.1 Ken Hornstein
• [nmh-workers] mhbuild(1)'s `-check' Belongs to Another. Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mhbuild(1)'s `-check' Belongs to Another. David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mhbuild(1)'s `-check' Belongs to Another. valdis . kletnieks
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mhbuild(1)'s `-check' Belongs to Another. David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mhbuild(1)'s `-check' Belongs to Another. Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mhbuild(1)'s `-check' Belongs to Another. Ken Hornstein
• [nmh-workers] Old MH Source. Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Old MH Source. David Malone
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Old MH Source. David Levine
• [nmh-workers] A discovered Resource Martin McCormick
  • Re: [nmh-workers] A discovered Resource David Levine
• [nmh-workers] mhshow and Headers Martin McCormick
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mhshow and Headers Martin McCormick
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mhshow and Headers Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mhshow and Headers Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mhshow and Headers Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mhshow and Headers Robert Elz
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mhshow and Headers Ralph Corderoy
• [nmh-workers] The message Body Shows but the Subject doesn't Decode. Martin McCormick
  • Re: [nmh-workers] The message Body Shows but the Subject doesn't Decode. Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] The message Body Shows but the Subject doesn't Decode. Leonardo Taccari
  • Re: [nmh-workers] The message Body Shows but the Subject doesn't Decode. Martin McCormick
  • Re: [nmh-workers] The message Body Shows but the Subject doesn't Decode. Martin McCormick
• [nmh-workers] can comp return the filename of the newly created draft? Eduardo Alvarez
  • Re: [nmh-workers] can comp return the filename of the newly created draft? Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] can comp return the filename of the newly created draft? Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] can comp return the filename of the newly created draft? Eduardo Alvarez
  • Re: [nmh-workers] can comp return the filename of the newly created draft? hymie
  • Re: [nmh-workers] can comp return the filename of the newly created draft? Eduardo Alvarez
• [nmh-workers] Cleaning up old messages Peter Davis
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Cleaning up old messages Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Cleaning up old messages Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Cleaning up old messages David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Cleaning up old messages Peter Davis
• [nmh-workers] Help! norm
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Help! Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Help! David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Help! Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Help! David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Help! λ
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Help! David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Help! norm
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Help! Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Help! Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Help! Cyber
• [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option Cyber
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option Cyber
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option Cyber
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option Cyber
  • Re: [nmh-workers] mts.conf relative sendmail option David Levine
• [nmh-workers] sndmail program with parameters? Eduardo Alvarez
  • Re: [nmh-workers] sndmail program with parameters? Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] sndmail program with parameters? Eduardo Alvarez
• [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs nmh
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs nmh
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs nmh
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs nmh
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs nmh
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Andy Bradford
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Michael Richardson
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Anthony J. Bentley
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Bob Carragher
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Anthony J. Bentley
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Michael Richardson
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Jon Fairbairn
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs Bob Carragher
• [nmh-workers] The neatmail MUA. Ralph Corderoy
• [nmh-workers] bug report -- message does not go away Edo (Edoardo Biagioni)
  • Re: [nmh-workers] bug report -- message does not go away David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] bug report -- message does not go away Edo (Edoardo Biagioni)
  • Re: [nmh-workers] bug report -- message does not go away Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] bug report -- message does not go away Edo (Edoardo Biagioni)
  • Re: [nmh-workers] bug report -- message does not go away Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] bug report -- message does not go away Edo (Edoardo Biagioni)
  • Re: [nmh-workers] bug report -- message does not go away Leonardo Taccari
  • Re: [nmh-workers] bug report -- message does not go away Edo (Edoardo Biagioni)
  • Re: [nmh-workers] bug report -- message does not go away Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] bug report -- message does not go away Edo (Edoardo Biagioni)
• Re: [nmh-workers] [Nmh-workers] Incorporating RSS and Atom feeds Thomas Levine
• [nmh-workers] Autocrypt Thomas Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Autocrypt Ralph Corderoy
• [nmh-workers] inc only incorporates one email from spool scrumpyjack
  • Re: [nmh-workers] inc only incorporates one email from spool Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] inc only incorporates one email from spool Robert Elz
  • Re: [nmh-workers] inc only incorporates one email from spool Ralph Corderoy
• [nmh-workers] Since the (automatic) upgrade to 1.7.1 on CentOS 7.4.1708, send doesn't work Kevin Layer
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Since the (automatic) upgrade to 1.7.1 on CentOS 7.4.1708, send doesn't work Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Since the (automatic) upgrade to 1.7.1 on CentOS 7.4.1708, send doesn't work Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Since the (automatic) upgrade to 1.7.1 on CentOS 7.4.1708, send doesn't work Kevin Layer
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Since the (automatic) upgrade to 1.7.1 on CentOS 7.4.1708, send doesn't work Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Since the (automatic) upgrade to 1.7.1 on CentOS 7.4.1708, send doesn't work Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Since the (automatic) upgrade to 1.7.1 on CentOS 7.4.1708, send doesn't work Kevin Layer
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Since the (automatic) upgrade to 1.7.1 on CentOS 7.4.1708, send doesn't work Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Since the (automatic) upgrade to 1.7.1 on CentOS 7.4.1708, send doesn't work David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Since the (automatic) upgrade to 1.7.1 on CentOS 7.4.1708, send doesn't work Tom Lane
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Since the (automatic) upgrade to 1.7.1 on CentOS 7.4.1708, send doesn't work Ralph Corderoy
• [nmh-workers] nmh 1.7.1 for Fedora and RHEL David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] nmh 1.7.1 for Fedora and RHEL Jon Steinhart
  • Re: [nmh-workers] nmh 1.7.1 for Fedora and RHEL David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] nmh 1.7.1 for Fedora and RHEL Jon Steinhart
  • Re: [nmh-workers] nmh 1.7.1 for Fedora and RHEL Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] nmh 1.7.1 for Fedora and RHEL Ralph Corderoy
• Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Paul Vixie
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Paul Fox
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Andy Bradford
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Bakul Shah
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? David Levine
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Robert Elz
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Bakul Shah
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Robert Elz
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Paul Fox
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Paul Fox
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Jon Fairbairn
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Steffen Nurpmeso
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Paul Fox
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Paul Vixie
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Bakul Shah
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Steffen Nurpmeso
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Steffen Nurpmeso
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Steffen Nurpmeso
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Robert Elz
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Steffen Nurpmeso
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Bakul Shah
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Steffen Nurpmeso
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Andy Bradford
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Paul Vixie
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Robert Elz
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ken Hornstein
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Andy Bradford
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ralph Corderoy
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? valdis . kletnieks
  • Re: [nmh-workers] Unnecessary dependency on vi??? Ralph Corderoy

• Later messages