On Monday 27 April 2009, Alexey Eremenko wrote: > Yes I agree. A bit annoying bug.
This is not a bug but a feature. After a longer discusson I decided to remove the Reply-To: header by intension. See for instance http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html We've got some complaints that this header field should be removed for such reason. Actually it shouldn't matter for a modern MUA if the field is set or not. Kind regards, Frank -- Dr.-Ing. Frank Mehnert Sun Microsystems http://www.sun.com/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ vbox-dev mailing list [email protected] http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
