"Michael T. Babcock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Incidentally, is there a discussion in the past that I've missed about 'void >main' declarations? :-) Yes. A quick search of the archives for "void main" yields: http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1996/12/msg01898.html -Dave
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Adam McKenna
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relayin... markd
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relayin... Michael T. Babcock
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relayin... Eric Cox
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relayin... Joe Kelsey
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relayin... Michael T. Babcock
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relayin... Adam McKenna
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Mark Mentovai
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! John White
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relayin... Michael T. Babcock
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Dave Sill
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Michael T. Babcock
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Mark Mentovai
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Dave Sill
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Paul Jarc
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Michael T. Babcock
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Dave Sill
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Michael T. Babcock
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Petr Novotny
- Re: void main Jan Echternach
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Paul Jarc
