-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bruno Friedmann wrote:
> Ryan Novosielski wrote:
>> Dan Langille wrote:
>>> On 21 Aug 2007 at 12:47, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
Dan Langille wrote:
> On 20 Aug 2007 at 0:40, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
>
>> Dan Langille wrote:
>>> On 18 A
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Langille wrote:
> On 21 Aug 2007 at 12:47, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
>
>> Dan Langille wrote:
>>> On 20 Aug 2007 at 0:40, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
>>>
Dan Langille wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2007 at 11:00, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
>
>> Dan La
On 21 Aug 2007 at 12:47, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
> Dan Langille wrote:
> > On 20 Aug 2007 at 0:40, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
> >
> >> Dan Langille wrote:
> >>> On 18 Aug 2007 at 11:00, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
> >>>
> Dan Langille wrote:
> > On 18 Aug 2007 at 2:00, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Langille wrote:
> On 20 Aug 2007 at 0:40, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
>
>> Dan Langille wrote:
>>> On 18 Aug 2007 at 11:00, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
>>>
Dan Langille wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2007 at 2:00, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>
>> Since
Frank Sweetser wrote:
> Dan Langille wrote:
>
>> On 18 Aug 2007 at 11:00, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Dan Langille wrote:
>>>
On 18 Aug 2007 at 2:00, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> Since upgrading to 2.2.0 bsmtp sets the wrong Date: header in the mail:
Dan Langille wrote:
.
>>
>> Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 23:57:00 + (%z)
>>
>> ...that don't look right to me. :) I suspect %z and %Z may not be
>> handled properly on non-Linux? Is that even possible? I thought most of
>> this stuff kinda stuck to POSIX for this kind of thing, whatever
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Langille wrote:
> On 20 Aug 2007 at 0:40, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
>
>> Dan Langille wrote:
>>> On 18 Aug 2007 at 11:00, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
>>>
Dan Langille wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2007 at 2:00, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>
>> Since
On 20 Aug 2007 at 0:40, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
> Dan Langille wrote:
> > On 18 Aug 2007 at 11:00, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
> >
> >> Dan Langille wrote:
> >>> On 18 Aug 2007 at 2:00, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> >>>
> Since upgrading to 2.2.0 bsmtp sets the wrong Date: header in the mail:
> >>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Langille wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2007 at 11:00, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
>
>> Dan Langille wrote:
>>> On 18 Aug 2007 at 2:00, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>>>
Since upgrading to 2.2.0 bsmtp sets the wrong Date: header in the mail:
Date: Sat, 18 A
Dan Langille wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2007 at 11:00, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
>
>> Dan Langille wrote:
>>> On 18 Aug 2007 at 2:00, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>>>
Since upgrading to 2.2.0 bsmtp sets the wrong Date: header in the mail:
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 01:48:56 + (CEST)
For the
On 18 Aug 2007 at 11:00, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
> Dan Langille wrote:
> > On 18 Aug 2007 at 2:00, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> >
> >> Since upgrading to 2.2.0 bsmtp sets the wrong Date: header in the mail:
> >> Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 01:48:56 + (CEST)
> >>
> >> For the recipient the above mes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Langille wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2007 at 2:00, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>
>> Since upgrading to 2.2.0 bsmtp sets the wrong Date: header in the mail:
>> Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 01:48:56 + (CEST)
>>
>> For the recipient the above message appears to h
On 18 Aug 2007 at 2:00, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> Since upgrading to 2.2.0 bsmtp sets the wrong Date: header in the mail:
> Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 01:48:56 + (CEST)
>
> For the recipient the above message appears to have been receieved at
> 03:48, two hours ahead.
>
> The correct timezone
Since upgrading to 2.2.0 bsmtp sets the wrong Date: header in the mail:
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 01:48:56 + (CEST)
For the recipient the above message appears to have been receieved at
03:48, two hours ahead.
The correct timezone is UTC +2, the above header should have read
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2
14 matches
Mail list logo