Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

On Thu, 2023-12-21 at 10:12 -0500, Pocket wrote: > > On 12/21/23 09:46, Brad Rogers wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 09:25:26 -0500 > > Pocket wrote: > > > > Hello Pocket, > > > > > Forwarded Message > > Putting a private message on the list, without sender's consent, is > >

Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

On 21 Dec 2023 09:25 -0500, from poc...@columbus.rr.com (Pocket): > Forwarded Message > Subject: Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists] > Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 14:15:23 + > From: Andy Smith > Reply-To: a...

Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

On 12/21/23 09:46, Brad Rogers wrote: On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 09:25:26 -0500 Pocket wrote: Hello Pocket, Forwarded Message Putting a private message on the list, without sender's consent, is very rude indeed. Given that it was announced by sender beforehand that they would

Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 09:25:26 -0500 Pocket wrote: Hello Pocket, > Forwarded Message Putting a private message on the list, without sender's consent, is very rude indeed. Given that it was announced by sender beforehand that they would reply privately, I'm absolutely certain

Re: Fwd: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

21.12.2023 at 15:25 Pocket: (forwarded direct mail) Stop this. There's still a slight chance that some of the list readers have not yet decided to ignore your mail. Also stop trying to trigger some sort of guilt her. It's not going to work. Cheers, Arno -- Arno Lehmann IT-Service Lehmann

Fwd: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

Forwarded Message Subject:Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists] Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 14:15:23 + From: Andy Smith Reply-To: a...@strugglers.net To: Pocket Hello, [off-list] On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 08:58:28AM -0500, Pocket

Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

On 12/21/23 09:10, Hanno 'Rince' Wagner wrote: Hi Pocket, On Thu, 21 Dec 2023, Pocket wrote: What is your official capacity for debian? This is the mailinglist debian-user, where User help User with their problems. Mainly Desktop-related some server-related. but this is a user (in the

Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

Hello all, I did see the request from Andy Cater to bring this thread to a close so I am only going to answer the below questions off-list and do my part to not prolong this. Hopefully you didn't feel that you missed anything.  Thanks, Andy On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 08:58:28AM -0500, Pocket

Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

On 12/21/23 08:49, Andy Smith wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 07:35:44AM -0500, Pocket wrote: On 12/21/23 06:32, Andy Smith wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 05:44:23AM -0500, Pocket wrote: Maybe I should not post at all? Unless you are able to do better at it, that is a solution that I for

Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 07:35:44AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > On 12/21/23 06:32, Andy Smith wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 05:44:23AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > > > Maybe I should not post at all? > > Unless you are able to do better at it, that is a solution that I > > for one am in favour of. > >

Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

On Thu, 2023-12-21 at 07:35 -0500, Pocket wrote: > > On 12/21/23 06:32, Andy Smith wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 05:44:23AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > > > Maybe I should not post at all? > > Unless you are able to do better at it, that is a solution that I > > for one am in favour of. > > > >

Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

On 12/21/23 06:32, Andy Smith wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 05:44:23AM -0500, Pocket wrote: Maybe I should not post at all? Unless you are able to do better at it, that is a solution that I for one am in favour of. Andy So I see that I am not welcome here. Ok fine, I will take my leave

Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 05:44:23AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > Maybe I should not post at all? Unless you are able to do better at it, that is a solution that I for one am in favour of. Andy -- https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

Sent from my iPad > On Dec 21, 2023, at 5:37 AM, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 06:57:50PM -0500, Pocket wrote: >> > > Could we please stop the thread now? You appear to be talking past each > other at this point. Various suggestions as to the nature of the problem >

Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists]

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 06:57:50PM -0500, Pocket wrote: > Could we please stop the thread now? You appear to be talking past each other at this point. Various suggestions as to the nature of the problem and possible solutions have been put forward - it is absolutely for you to choose whatever

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 18:41, John Hasler wrote: pocket writes: I never implied that, only that the ISP services are spectrum only in the area I live. No Starlik? In any case what ISP you use is unrelated to what email provider you use. I use pobox.com, but there are others. No starlink I have

Re: lists

pocket writes: > I never implied that, only that the ISP services are spectrum only in the > area I live. No Starlik? In any case what ISP you use is unrelated to what email provider you use. I use pobox.com, but there are others. -- John Hasler j...@sugarbit.com Elmwood, WI USA

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 17:59, gene heskett wrote: On 12/20/23 14:14, Marco Moock wrote: Am 20.12.2023 um 14:04:41 Uhr schrieb Pocket: I have emails from other lists and personal email from other with the same time frame So in this case it was not because the email box/account was not available. Are

Re: lists

On 21/12/23 11:55, Pocket wrote: On 12/20/23 17:37, gene heskett wrote: On 12/20/23 12:05, Pocket wrote: On 12/20/23 11:51, gene heskett wrote: On 12/20/23 08:30, Pocket wrote: If I get one bounce email I am banned, I will never get to even 10% as 2% and I am gone. That may be a side

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 14:14, Marco Moock wrote: Am 20.12.2023 um 14:04:41 Uhr schrieb Pocket: I have emails from other lists and personal email from other with the same time frame So in this case it was not because the email box/account was not available. Are you really that thick as a brick that you

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 17:37, gene heskett wrote: On 12/20/23 12:05, Pocket wrote: On 12/20/23 11:51, gene heskett wrote: On 12/20/23 08:30, Pocket wrote: On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: Hi, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 07:38:49AM -0500, Pocket wrote: which poc...@columbus.rr.com Not sure what

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 12:05, Pocket wrote: On 12/20/23 11:51, gene heskett wrote: On 12/20/23 08:30, Pocket wrote: On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: Hi, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 07:38:49AM -0500, Pocket wrote: which poc...@columbus.rr.com Not sure what you're trying to achieve but these

Re: lists

Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 20, 2023, at 3:29 PM, Marco Moock wrote: > > Am 20.12.2023 um 15:08:32 Uhr schrieb Pocket: > >> Sent from my iPhone > > Nobody is interested in that, maybe the auto-unsubscribe is a good > thing for all other list members. > Nobady is interested in you

Re: lists

Am 20.12.2023 um 15:08:32 Uhr schrieb Pocket: > Sent from my iPhone Nobody is interested in that, maybe the auto-unsubscribe is a good thing for all other list members. > > On Dec 20, 2023, at 2:14 PM, Marco Moock wrote: > > > > Am 20.12.2023 um 14:04:41 Uhr schrieb Pocket: > > > >> I

Re: lists

Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 20, 2023, at 2:14 PM, Marco Moock wrote: > > Am 20.12.2023 um 14:04:41 Uhr schrieb Pocket: > >> I have emails from other lists and personal email from other with the >> same time frame >> >> So in this case it was not because the email box/account was not >>

Re: lists

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 2:14 PM Marco Moock wrote: > > Am 20.12.2023 um 14:04:41 Uhr schrieb Pocket: > > > [...] > > And could that be the reason to multiple sessions were opened from > > debian list servers? > > No, the reason is that SMTP doesn't specify that only a special > amount of

Re: lists

Am 20.12.2023 um 14:04:41 Uhr schrieb Pocket: > I have emails from other lists and personal email from other with the > same time frame > > So in this case it was not because the email box/account was not > available. Are you really that thick as a brick that you don't understand that this is

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 13:40, Hanno 'Rince' Wagner wrote: Hi everybody, On Wed, 20 Dec 2023, Pocket wrote: What if there were more, that you did *not* see? Because they didn't get through. If mail isn't reaching you, then the mail *telling* you that mail isn't reaching you may also not reach you.

Re: lists

On 20 Dec 2023 12:00 -0500, from poc...@columbus.rr.com (Pocket): > The SMTP server on bendel.debian.org should have resent?  No? In one word: No. Because the mail in question was rejected by the recipient MTA (pkvw-mx.msg.pkvw.co.charter.net) with a PERMANENT error. This is clearly shown in

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 13:17, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 12:05:26PM -0500, Pocket wrote: I was kicked at 2% How do you *know*? What you *know* is that you *saw* *one* email message stating that emails have been trouble reaching you, and that if this continues, you will be

Re: lists

Pocket (12023-12-20): > Ok I will twist their arms and complain to the cops or maybe I should > comtact the DOJ, This kind of sarcasm is not constructive. You send a mail or open a ticket. If they do not fix the issue and do not give a good explanation, you take your mail archives and you move

Re: lists

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 12:05:26PM -0500, Pocket wrote: > I was kicked at 2% How do you *know*? What you *know* is that you *saw* *one* email message stating that emails have been trouble reaching you, and that if this continues, you will be unsubscribed. What if there were more, that you did

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 11:48, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:40:38AM -0500, Pocket wrote: [...] Still doesn't provide and answer for why I was kicked after one email bounced. You have seen just one bounce. Do you know your provider has shown you all of them? Perhaps they bounced

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 11:51, gene heskett wrote: On 12/20/23 08:30, Pocket wrote: On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: Hi, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 07:38:49AM -0500, Pocket wrote: which poc...@columbus.rr.com Not sure what you're trying to achieve but these administrative commands should go to the

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 11:51, Andy Smith wrote: Hello, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:44:42AM -0500, Pocket wrote: Does one email constitute "persistently undeliverable"? I hope that the Debian listmasters get back to you with more details, but I interpret Spectrum's reject message to mean that all mails

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 08:30, Pocket wrote: On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: Hi, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 07:38:49AM -0500, Pocket wrote: which poc...@columbus.rr.com Not sure what you're trying to achieve but these administrative commands should go to the mailing list software at , not to

Re: lists

Am 20.12.2023 um 16:49:17 Uhr schrieb Joe: > I'm not actually looking for an ident reply, I'm looking to hold up > the transaction for thirty seconds to weed out the spambots. This is a > convenient way to do it. sendmail offers the FEATURE GreetPause for exactly that behavior - without using

Re: lists

Hello, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:44:42AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > Does one email constitute "persistently undeliverable"? I hope that the Debian listmasters get back to you with more details, but I interpret Spectrum's reject message to mean that all mails from Debian's IP from that time forward

Re: lists

On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 17:14:05 +0100 Marco Moock wrote: > Am 20.12.2023 um 15:58:48 Uhr schrieb Joe: > > > For many years my SMTP server has requested an ident (TCP port 113) > > from outside sending servers. Since nobody now runs ident servers, > > there will be no reply, and my server waits for

Re: lists

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:40:38AM -0500, Pocket wrote: [...] > Still doesn't provide and answer for why I was kicked after one email > bounced. You have seen just one bounce. Do you know your provider has shown you all of them? Perhaps they bounced the other missing ones... Cheers -- t

Re: lists

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:44:42AM -0500, Pocket wrote: [...] > Does one email constitute "persistently undeliverable"? If *your* provider says so... Cheers -- t signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: lists

Am 20.12.2023 um 11:44:42 Uhr schrieb Pocket: > Does one email constitute "persistently undeliverable"? 5xx error indicate that, read the SMTP RFCs.

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 11:42, Andy Smith wrote: Hello, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:30:24AM -0500, Pocket wrote: On 12/20/23 11:26,to...@tuxteam.de wrote: And yes, yell to your provider. Everyone and her dog coming up with random policies is what's killing email. I am sure the will be quaking in their

Re: lists

Hello, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:30:24AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > On 12/20/23 11:26, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > And yes, yell to your provider. Everyone and her dog coming > > up with random policies is what's killing email. > > I am sure the will be quaking in their boots if I call them to

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 11:37, Andy Smith wrote: Hello, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:16:02AM -0500, Pocket wrote: On 12/20/23 11:12, Marco Moock wrote: Am 20.12.2023 um 11:07:16 Uhr schrieb Pocket: Spectrum limits the number of concurrent connections from a sender, as well as the total number of

Re: lists

Hello, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:16:02AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > On 12/20/23 11:12, Marco Moock wrote: > > Am 20.12.2023 um 11:07:16 Uhr schrieb Pocket: > > > Spectrum limits the number of concurrent connections from a sender, > > > as well as the total number of connections allowed. Limits vary

Re: lists

Am 20.12.2023 um 11:30:24 Uhr schrieb Pocket: > On 12/20/23 11:26, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:16:02AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > > > > [...] > > > >> Why is the user list the only one that has this issue? > > It is the busiest list, thus the bounce probability might >

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 11:31, Andy Smith wrote: Hello, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:07:16AM -0500, Pocket wrote: Spectrum limits the number of concurrent connections from a sender, as well as the total number of connections allowed. Limits vary based on the reputation of the IP address. Reduce your

Re: lists

Hello, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:07:16AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > Spectrum limits the number of concurrent connections from a sender, as well > as the total number of connections allowed. Limits vary based on the > reputation of the IP address. Reduce your number of connections and try > again

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 11:26, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:16:02AM -0500, Pocket wrote: [...] Why is the user list the only one that has this issue? It is the busiest list, thus the bounce probability might be the highest. And yes, yell to your provider. Everyone and her dog

Re: lists

Am 20.12.2023 um 17:26:25 Uhr schrieb Thomas Schmitt: > A while ago this list had a problem with fake bounces. A troll managed > to convince the list server that some of the subscribers would reject > the list mails. I am not familiar with the exact technical properties > of that attack and how

Re: lists

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 05:14:05PM +0100, Marco Moock wrote: > Am 20.12.2023 um 15:58:48 Uhr schrieb Joe: > > > For many years my SMTP server has requested an ident (TCP port 113) > > from outside sending servers. Since nobody now runs ident servers, > > there will be no reply, and my server

Re: lists

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 11:16:02AM -0500, Pocket wrote: [...] > Why is the user list the only one that has this issue? It is the busiest list, thus the bounce probability might be the highest. And yes, yell to your provider. Everyone and her dog coming up with random policies is what's killing

Re: lists

Hi, (Cc-ing poc...@columbus.rr.com just in case the unsubscription strikes again.) Pocket wrote: > I spend several days trying to subscribed to the list, with the web signup > ALWAYS time out with a gateway error. The mails from the list have these informational headers: List-Subscribe:

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 11:12, Marco Moock wrote: Am 20.12.2023 um 11:07:16 Uhr schrieb Pocket: Spectrum limits the number of concurrent connections from a sender, as well as the total number of connections allowed. Limits vary based on the reputation of the IP address. Reduce your number of connections

Re: lists

Am 20.12.2023 um 15:58:48 Uhr schrieb Joe: > For many years my SMTP server has requested an ident (TCP port 113) > from outside sending servers. Since nobody now runs ident servers, > there will be no reply, and my server waits for a timeout of thirty > seconds before continuing. Good admins

Re: lists

Am 20.12.2023 um 11:07:16 Uhr schrieb Pocket: > Spectrum limits the number of concurrent connections from a sender, > as well as the total number of connections allowed. Limits vary based > on the reputation of the IP address. Reduce your number of > connections and try again later. You can't

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 10:50, Andy Smith wrote: Hello, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 04:11:05PM +0100, Christoph Brinkhaus wrote: I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big mail providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting the next contact. Most spammers seem to try

Re: lists

On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 16:08:54 +0100 Marco Moock wrote: Hello Marco, >He can read that list via Usenet because it is gatewayed to it Thank you; I'm aware there are several ways to read the messages. I was merely pointing out the (perhaps) obvious. -- Regards _ "Valid sig separator is

Re: lists

On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 16:11:05 +0100 Christoph Brinkhaus wrote: > > I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big > mail providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting > the next contact. Most spammers seem to try just once. > > I am not sure if this is

Re: lists

Hello, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 10:43:04AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > On 12/20/23 10:35, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > For the gateway errors and majordomo delays, you should probably > > contact . Also see > > . > > That goes without any response, I can not tell if the

Re: lists

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 10:43 AM Pocket wrote: > > > On 12/20/23 10:35, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 10:28 AM Pocket wrote: > >> [...] > >> > >> I get/have a kick rate of 2% (one bounce in the last 60 days), then I am > >> kicked and no longer receive anything from the user

Re: lists

Hello, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 04:11:05PM +0100, Christoph Brinkhaus wrote: > I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big mail > providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting the next > contact. Most spammers seem to try just once. I think you are talking

Re: lists

On 20 Dec 2023 16:14 +0100, from m...@dorfdsl.de (Marco Moock): >> I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big >> mail providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting >> the next contact. Most spammers seem to try just once. > > Do they reject with 5xx or

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 10:35, Jeffrey Walton wrote: On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 10:28 AM Pocket wrote: [...] I get/have a kick rate of 2% (one bounce in the last 60 days), then I am kicked and no longer receive anything from the user list. After many attempts over several days... I finally get email

Re: lists

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 10:28 AM Pocket wrote: > > [...] > > I get/have a kick rate of 2% (one bounce in the last 60 days), then I am > kicked and no longer receive anything from the user list. > > After many attempts over several days... > > I finally get email from

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 10:11, Christoph Brinkhaus wrote: Am Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 08:13:12AM -0500 schrieb Pocket: On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: [...] Every 60 days I get kicked from this list which I receive an email stating my kick value is 2%. I receive this mails, too. The first impression

Re: lists

Am Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 04:14:57PM +0100 schrieb Marco Moock: > Am 20.12.2023 um 16:11:05 Uhr schrieb Christoph Brinkhaus: > > > I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big > > mail providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting > > the next contact. Most

Re: lists

Am 20.12.2023 um 16:11:05 Uhr schrieb Christoph Brinkhaus: > I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big > mail providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting > the next contact. Most spammers seem to try just once. Do they reject with 5xx or 4xx?

Re: lists

Am Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 08:13:12AM -0500 schrieb Pocket: > > On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: [...] > Every 60 days I get kicked from this list which I receive an email stating > my kick value is 2%. I receive this mails, too. The first impression is scary, but in the body there is an

Re: lists

Am 20.12.2023 um 13:39:04 Uhr schrieb Brad Rogers: > You don't need to be subbed to post to the list. Of course, you won't > receive any posts from the list. He can read that list via Usenet because it is gatewayed to it, nobody will block the messages there.

Re: lists

On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 08:13:12 -0500 Pocket wrote: Hello Pocket, >Every 60 days I get kicked from this list which I receive an email >stating my kick value is 2%. Sounds as though something is rejecting posts at your mail provider. Hence you get kicked. You don't need to be subbed to post to

Re: lists

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 08:13:12AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: > > these administrative commands should go to the mailing list > > software at , not to debian-user@, > > which is the list itself and its thousands of subscribers. […] > Every 60 days I get kicked

Re: lists

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 08:13:12AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > > On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 07:38:49AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > > > which poc...@columbus.rr.com > > Not sure what you're trying to achieve but these administrative > > commands should go

Re: lists

On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: Hi, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 07:38:49AM -0500, Pocket wrote: which poc...@columbus.rr.com Not sure what you're trying to achieve but these administrative commands should go to the mailing list software at , not to debian-user@, which is the list itself

Re: lists

Hi, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 07:38:49AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > which poc...@columbus.rr.com Not sure what you're trying to achieve but these administrative commands should go to the mailing list software at , not to debian-user@, which is the list itself and its thousands of subscribers. (A pity

Re: lists down? or did I get dropped?

On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 12:23:18AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: I haven't seen mail from the list in over 6 hours despite lists.d.o/d-u showing many mails in the archive. My last one was about 18:08 pacific, US, or 01:08 UTC Friday the 13th. Anybody else? I think I am getting the

Re: lists down? or did I get dropped?

Andrew Sackville-West wrote: I haven't seen mail from the list in over 6 hours despite lists.d.o/d-u showing many mails in the archive. My last one was about 18:08 pacific, US, or 01:08 UTC Friday the 13th. Anybody else? better cc me just in case. A Let's see... Friday the 13th!? That's

Re: lists down? or did I get dropped?

On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 01:21:18PM +0530, Kumar Appaiah wrote: On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 12:23:18AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: I haven't seen mail from the list in over 6 hours despite lists.d.o/d-u showing many mails in the archive. My last one was about 18:08 pacific, US, or 01:08

Re: lists down? or did I get dropped?

yeah. interesting. I got my own list mail back right away. THen shortly thereafter I got one that had been processed by the list maybe 7 or 8 hours previously. Now I've got about 50 or so. The tubes must have been clogged... or something .. i know (raises hand) they were all deported to cuba

[OT} Re: lists

Jacek Kawa napisał. Jak podają anonimowe źródła, przepowiedziano, że Mccullough Luann napisze: badger verging on the Desert of Sahara; but she soon found out how matters me that crowning service. Miss Mills accepted this trust, too; but okay teapot for punishment because he wouldnt, that

Re: Lists of commands

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am looking for a list of commands that are only to debian. I want to learn debian but it would be nice if there was a list of commands that are specific to debian and a description of what these commands do. If it exists, please let me

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 10:04:32AM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: Not a doc bug -- that part of the documentation is immediately created from the relevant program code. But, of course, the Debian package may unset use_domain in the systemwide configuration file /etc/Muttrc. That's exactly

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

On 2003-05-25 13:23:32 -0400, Gregory Seidman wrote: I'm trying to figure this out myself. In particular, it looks like there might be a bug in either the documentation or (I hope) mutt 1.4. The documentation says that the ~l pattern matches messages to known lists (anything matched in a

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 02:39:13PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: The logic for the mail-followup-to header is a little more complicated, and involves both subscribed and known lists. First of all, mutt will only generate a mail-followup-to header if (1) the $followup_to option is set,

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

On a related note: I noticed that my reply had: Mail-Followup-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Debian users list [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mutt users list [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not my address. I didn't have $hostname set in my .muttrc so I assume it set the Mail-Followup-To:

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 01:40:51PM -0700, Bill Moseley wrote: On a related note: I noticed that my reply had: Mail-Followup-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Debian users list [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mutt users list [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not my address. I didn't have

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

* Bill Moseley [EMAIL PROTECTED] [05-29-03 18:36]: On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 02:39:13PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: The logic for the mail-followup-to header is a little more complicated, and involves both subscribed and known lists. First of all, mutt will only generate a

Re: lists vs. subscribe (was Re: mutt to follow discussions.)

On 2003-05-29 14:24:38 -0700, Bill Moseley wrote: And to follow up to my own post. Mutt 1.5.4i (2003-03-19) does not set $use_domain yes by default. The docs say: use_domain Type: boolean Default: yes When set, Mutt will qualify all local addresses (ones without the @host portion)

Re: Lists of Maintainers

Hello, Manoj very kindly delegated this job to me. I take it that a few more days will not matter unduely, so I will have a think about what is required and maybe even do a dummy run with half a dozen developers to see what sort of problems appear. Any comments and hints along the way will be