Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman and phone bills

2001-06-24 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Phil Stracchino wrote: *8-year-old kids* fer crissake know that it doesn't cost any money to answer a call when the phone rings. On a land line in the US. You can't speak with authority about anything else, can you? -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE

Re: [Mailman-Users] Announcement only

2001-06-14 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001, Jeremy Sharp wrote: Can I ensure that my list: - will not pass unauthorised posts for moderation, but just rejects them This is not possible in any released version of the software. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box

Re: [Mailman-Users] How to silently, automatically reject ALLimplicit destination messages?

2001-06-11 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote: ...nothing new. Sorry, folks, meant to hit cancel instead of send. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309San Francisco, CA 94114 Go without hate

Re: [Mailman-Users] Re: MIME messages

2001-06-06 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, Barry A. Warsaw wrote: Could someone write up a quick list of requirements for demimeing that they'd like to see encorporated directly into Mailman 2.1? I entered a short proposal, but wasn't logged in, so they're in as Anonymous User, alas. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE

Re: [Mailman-Users] MTA username question

2001-05-17 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
on for the local mailer. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309San Francisco, CA 94114 There is only one real blasphemy -- the refusal of joy! -- Paul Rudnick

Re: [Mailman-Users] big lists, big messages

2001-05-13 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
On Sun, 13 May 2001, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: As wireless mobile becomes more significant, it'll be a growing issue, not a shrinking one. Do you expect wireless mobile NOT to have web access? Hell, I use my web access when mobile much more than my email access. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE

Re: [Mailman-Users] Attributes List

2001-05-09 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
doesn't build a separate copy for each recipient, so it can't be customized this way. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309San Francisco, CA 94114 There is only one real blasphemy -- the refusal of joy

Re: [Mailman-Users] qrunner unexpected EOF

2001-04-23 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Stuart Clark wrote: 0,10,20,.30,40,50 * * * * /usr/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/cron/qrunner Not clear to me how or if it could be an issue... but you have .30 for 30. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309

Re: [Mailman-Users] Help request

2001-04-20 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
and forgot the pipe character. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309San Francisco, CA 94114 "There is only one real blasphemy -- the ref

RE: [Mailman-Users] URGENT - how can I get a text list of subscribers

2001-04-12 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
to be convinced that anyone whose so-called technicians can't delete a file from a directory and kill a few processes doesn't really deserve the business. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309San Francisco

[Mailman-Users] Re: Rude response! I got my subscriber list

2001-04-12 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
inappropriate in technical forums. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309San Francisco, CA 94114 "There is only one real blasphemy -- the refusal of joy!" -- Pa

[Mailman-Users] Re: Rude response!

2001-04-12 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
because of the advertising... -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309San Francisco, CA 94114 "There is only one real blasphemy -- the refusal of joy!" -- Pa

[Mailman-Users] Re: Time to move on :o)

2001-04-12 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
-- with some info about the technicians you're talking about? Are they your company's or your ISP's? Do they have administrative access to the server? -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309San

Re: [Mailman-Users] wrong sender host name.

2001-03-27 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Leif Neland wrote: I guess this is really a sendmail problem. Is "nocanonify" the right option to avoid this? The rightest way is to use A records instead of CNAMEs. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mail headers with Mailman

2001-02-18 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
ers. I am getting hasseled by some users and if I can point them to the source it is likely to make my life a little more peaceful. RFC2369, "The Use of URLs as Meta-Syntax for Core Mail List Commands and their Transport through Message Header Fields", Neufeld Baer. --

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mail headers with Mailman

2001-02-15 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
. Thanks. I use Eudora at home all the time, though, and it DOESN'T show these headers by default... -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309San Francisco, CA 94114 "There is only one real blas

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mail headers with Mailman

2001-02-15 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Ed Lazor wrote: How about adding something to the FAQ that describes what changes to make? Well, (a) it's a rarely-asked, not frequently-asked, question, and (b) it will slow adoption of the RFC. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mail headers with Mailman

2001-02-15 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
their orders. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309San Francisco, CA 94114 "There is only one real blasphemy -- the refusal of joy!" -- Pa

Re: [Mailman-Users] Wish: Change address.

2001-02-06 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
s - subscribe the new address with those settings - if successful, unsubscribe the old address ...as one operation. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309San Francisco, CA 94114 "There is

Re: [Mailman-Users] email headers question?

2001-02-05 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
that were not RFC822-compliant, would you do so just because they asked? Sometimes education, not capitulation, is your job. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 14309San Francisco, CA 94114

Re: [Mailman-Users] Re: Mailman-Users digest, Vol 1 #955 - 18 msgs

2001-01-07 Thread Roger B.A. Klorese
On Sun, 7 Jan 2001, Dan Mick wrote: Does the fact that your prompt is root# mean that you *are* root? If so, then no, on any Unix I know of, there's no way you should be setting permission failures. ...without an NFS mount, that is. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE