Testing (2). Please ignore.
--
(Plain text sometimes corrupted to HTML "courtesy" of Microsoft Exchange.)
Testing. Please ignore.
--
(Plain text sometimes corrupted to HTML "courtesy" of Microsoft Exchange.)
Am 2008-07-18 12:04:35, schrieb Steve C. Lamb:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 04:01:31PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> > I do not believe it, since I am admin a Courier-Imap Server with 73.000
> > users ith 2.8 million legitim messages and 8 million spams per day.
>
> And a d-u troll.
>
> > I
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 04:01:31PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> I do not believe it, since I am admin a Courier-Imap Server with 73.000
> users ith 2.8 million legitim messages and 8 million spams per day.
And a d-u troll.
> I would never use mbox for such stuff... and of course, a ma
Am 2008-07-13 14:06:51, schrieb Steve Lamb:
> My apologies to Ron, I slapped reply and not reply-to-all and trim. :(
>
> Ron Johnson wrote:
> > That's qmail's fault, not that of Maildir.
>
> No, that is a design problem in Maildir. Granted I wouldn't want my MTAs
I do not believe it, s
My apologies to Ron, I slapped reply and not reply-to-all and trim. :(
Ron Johnson wrote:
> That's qmail's fault, not that of Maildir.
No, that is a design problem in Maildir. Granted I wouldn't want my MTAs
using a flat file for all its traffic, it makes no sense there for how short
li
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 08:31:06PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 07/10/08 12:38, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 01:38:35PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> >> On 07/09/08 13:26, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >>> try a different MUA?
> >> This is why IMAP should be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/13/08 04:14, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>> Maybe it's because I keep d-u messages is semi-annual history
>> folders so directories never get above 10,000 files, but what
>> problems do Maildirs have?
>
>> Needing to open many files i
Ron Johnson wrote:
> Maybe it's because I keep d-u messages is semi-annual history
> folders so directories never get above 10,000 files, but what
> problems do Maildirs have?
> Needing to open many files instead of one?
Needing to deal with that many files in any capacity, ever. I've
had th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/12/08 18:46, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Nate Duehr wrote:
>> We really gotta get you over to Maildir someday, Steve. ;-)
>
> Uh, no, thanks. I far prefer mbox's problems to maildir's.
Maybe it's because I keep d-u messages is semi-annual history
Nate Duehr wrote:
We really gotta get you over to Maildir someday, Steve. ;-)
Uh, no, thanks. I far prefer mbox's problems to maildir's.
Then you can back up mail directories with thinks like rdiff and not
pull in the whole mbox file into the backup again. Just the new mail.
(GRIN)
Nate Duehr wrote:
> We really gotta get you over to Maildir someday, Steve. ;-)
>
> Then you can back up mail directories with thinks like rdiff and not
> pull in the whole mbox file into the backup again. Just the new
> mail. (GRIN)
While I do think Maildir is a lot better than mbox, applicati
On Jul 10, 2008, at 11:51 AM, Steve C. Lamb wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:38:21AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 01:38:35PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 07/09/08 13:26, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
This is why IMAP should be the standard mail store, not mboxes
Wackojacko wrote:
> Steve Lamb wrote:
>> Dovecot doesn't do sieve.
> There is a plug-in for sieve.
> http://wiki.dovecot.org/LDA/Sieve
> HTH
Hell yeah it helps. Hm, they're compiled in by default in Ubuntu, wonder
if that means Debian too. Also...
http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/i
Steve Lamb wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Of course, it drops mails directly into Maildir folders, so you'd
have to tell Dovcot to use Maildir instead of mbox. But that should
not be hard.
I was talking about the filters from the client more than the subfolders.
Dovecot doesn't do sieve.
Th
Ron Johnson wrote:
> Of course, it drops mails directly into Maildir folders, so you'd
> have to tell Dovcot to use Maildir instead of mbox. But that should
> not be hard.
I was talking about the filters from the client more than the subfolders.
Dovecot doesn't do sieve.
signature.asc
Des
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/10/08 12:38, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 01:38:35PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
>> On 07/09/08 13:26, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> try a different MUA?
>> This is why IMAP should be the standard mail store,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/10/08 12:51, Steve C. Lamb wrote:
[snip]
>
> The only thing I miss in that setup, really, is the ability to configure
> filters from inside the client and subfolders. I know both are possible if I
> switch to another IMAP server. However I
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 01:51:01PM -0400, Steve C. Lamb wrote:
> The only thing I miss in that setup, really, is the ability to configure
> filters from inside the client and subfolders. I know both are possible if
> I switch to another IMAP server. However I would lose the flexibility of
> s
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:38:21AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 01:38:35PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On 07/09/08 13:26, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > This is why IMAP should be the standard mail store, not mboxes in
> > "proprietary" locations.
> second tha
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 01:38:35PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 07/09/08 13:26, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> [snip]
> >
> > try a different MUA?
>
> This is why IMAP should be the standard mail store, not mboxes in
> "proprietary" locations.
second that. THe convenience is incredible. Case i
On Wed,09.Jul.08, 12:41:57, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
> Any idea how to confirm that it's the mail server and not my MUA (SeaMonkey
> 1.1.9, which I don't suspect but would want to rule out)?
Subscribe a different address (on a different server)?
Regards,
Andrei
--
If you can't explain it simply
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/09/08 13:26, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
[snip]
>
> try a different MUA?
This is why IMAP should be the standard mail store, not mboxes in
"proprietary" locations.
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
"Kittens give Morbo gas. In lighter
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 12:41:57PM -0400, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
> Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 11:33:39AM -0400, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
> ...
> >>
> >> P.S. How do I change my debian-user subscription to have the mailing list
> >> server send me a copy of my own posts?
I wrote, slightly too quickly:
> Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> ...
>>> P.S. How do I change my debian-user subscription to have the mailing
>>> list
>>> server send me a copy of my own posts? The MajorDomo/SmartList help
>>> response
>>> message doesn't says anything about changing that setting.
ress 'e' to edit
the whole message (in vim in my case) and at the top of the html
section there is:
Re: getting copies of own posted messages; was: Re: ??: Stunned =
by aptitude.
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 11:33:39AM -0400, Barclay, Daniel =
wrote:
It
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/09/08 11:40, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>
>> On 07/09/08 10:33, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> Now if I can figure out how to get the mail server configuration fixed ..
>>
>> Replacing Lookout with Postfix would do the tri
Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
...
>> P.S. How do I change my debian-user subscription to have the mailing list
>> server send me a copy of my own posts? The MajorDomo/SmartList help response
>> message doesn't says anything about changing that setting.
>>
>> (Not getting such copies is part of why I
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 11:33:39AM -0400, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
...
>>
>> P.S. How do I change my debian-user subscription to have the mailing list
>> server send me a copy of my own posts? The MajorDomo/SmartList help response
>> message doesn't says anything abou
Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 07/09/08 10:33, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
> [snip]
>> Now if I can figure out how to get the mail server configuration fixed ..
>
> Replacing Lookout with Postfix would do the trick.
Did you mean Exchange? (I thought "Lookout" referred to Outlook, which I'm
not using.)
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Barclay, Daniel wrote:
> Chris Davies wrote:
>> Barclay, Daniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Why don't you just copy the text and paste it into a message?
>> Follows. Notice that even the text/plain part is base64 encoded.
>
> Thanks. (And thanks t
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 11:33:39AM -0400, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
> Chris Davies wrote:
> > Barclay, Daniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Why don't you just copy the text and paste it into a message?
> >
> > Follows. Notice that even the text/plain part is base64 encoded.
>
> Thanks. (And thank
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/09/08 10:33, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
[snip]
>
> Now if I can figure out how to get the mail server configuration fixed ..
Replacing Lookout with Postfix would do the trick. Might be a bit
of an upheaval, though...
[snip]
> I wonder how long it
Chris Davies wrote:
> Barclay, Daniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Why don't you just copy the text and paste it into a message?
>
> Follows. Notice that even the text/plain part is base64 encoded.
Thanks. (And thanks to others who sent me copies.)
Now if I can figure out how to get the mail s
On 07/08/2008 10:01 AM, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
Does this message come across:
- with an HTML part?
- base64-encoded?
Thanks.
Daniel
[Test 2 of 3: w/ chars; ISO-8859-1 (?)]
Yes, there is an HTML part.
No, there is no base64-encoding on either the text or HTML parts.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, e
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/08/08 10:01, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
>
> Does this message come across:
> - with an HTML part?
Yes.
> - base64-encoded?
No.
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
"Kittens give Morbo gas. In lighter news, the city of New New
York is doomed
Hello Daniel,
On 2008-07-08, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
>
> Does this message come across:
> - with an HTML part?
> - base64-encoded?
>
Yes to both.
Regards,
--
Christer
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMA
Hello Daniel,
On 2008-07-08, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
>
> Does this message come across:
> - with an HTML part?
> - base64-encoded?
>
Yes to the first. Neither part was base64-encoded.
Regards,
--
Christer
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject o
Hello Daniel,
On 2008-07-08, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
>
> Does this message come across:
> - with an HTML part?
> - base64-encoded?
>
Yes to both.
Regards,
--
Christer
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMA
Does this message come across:
- with an HTML part?
- base64-encoded?
Thanks.
Daniel
[Test 2 of 3: w/ chars; ISO-8859-1 (?)]
Barclay, Daniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why don't you just copy the text and paste it into a message?
Follows. Notice that even the text/plain part is base64 encoded.
Chris
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 8 09:10:00 2008
Path:
news.enta.net!news.mediascape.de!newsfeed-0.progon.net!progon.
El lun, 07-07-2008 a las 17:42 -0500, Mark Allums escribió:
> Mark Allums wrote:
> > Barclay, Daniel wrote:
> > >
> > > I suspect that a mail server or gateway between here and there is
> > > reformatting
> > > my message.
> >
> > Unlikely. Occam's razor says you are sending that way, and can
On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
Screw you and the stupid Microsoft shit that FGM uses.
I've been trying to gather evidence to show that our mail server (or its
configuration) is corrupting messages (turning plain-text messages into HTML
messages) and causing problems (e.g., this ta
I wrote:
...
>
> Somebody please send me a copy of one of these messages that you see
> with HTML
> and/or base64 encoding. ...
Okay, I got a few. Thanks.
Note that not all of them are the same regarding the transfer encoding:
Most have been base64, but one was something else (I forgot now,
Mark Allums wrote:
Barclay, Daniel wrote:
>
> I suspect that a mail server or gateway between here and there is
> reformatting
> my message.
Unlikely. Occam's razor says you are sending that way, and can't see it
with your software ecosystem.
I have been wrong before...
And also now.
er or gateway between here and there is reformatting
my message.
You may be right (and I was wrong).
From the HTML in your message:
Re: ??: Stunned by aptitude.
Tee-hee.
Ooh, I didn't think of that! Exchange! Of course!
Mark Allums
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTE
Barclay, Daniel wrote:
>
> I suspect that a mail server or gateway between here and there is
> reformatting
> my message.
Unlikely. Occam's razor says you are sending that way, and can't see it
with your software ecosystem.
I have been wrong before...
> I also suspect that it's related to t
Ron Johnson wrote:
...
> On 07/07/08 17:07, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
>> Ron Johnson wrote:
>>> On 07/07/08 16:28, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
>> ...
>>
Where the heck are you seeing base64 encoding?
>>> Here is a screenprint of an Iceweasel View->"Message Source" of your
>> An image? Come on! Why d
hat a mail server or gateway between here and there is reformatting
> my message.
>From the HTML in your message:
Re: ??: Stunned by aptitude.
Tee-hee.
--
"Police noticed some rustling sounds from Linn's bottom area
and on closer inspection a roll of cash was found protruding
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/07/08 17:07, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>>
>> On 07/07/08 16:28, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
> ...
>
>>> Where the heck are you seeing base64 encoding?
>>
>> Here is a screenprint of an Iceweasel View->"Message Source" of your
>
> A
Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 16:52 -0400, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
>> Paul Johnson wrote:
...
>> What that heck are you talking about? My message was sent in plain
>> text, not HTML.
>
> The message I am replying to, as was the one in question, is HTML, not
> plain text.
Well, that
I wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
...
>> On 07/07/08 16:28, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
> ...
>
>>> Where the heck are you seeing base64 encoding?
>>
>> Here is a screenprint of an Iceweasel View->"Message Source" of your
>
> An image? Come on! Why don't you just copy the text and paste it into a
> mess
Ron Johnson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 07/07/08 16:28, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
...
>> Where the heck are you seeing base64 encoding?
>
> Here is a screenprint of an Iceweasel View->"Message Source" of your
An image? Come on! Why don't you just copy the text
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/07/08 16:28, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
> Mark Allums wrote:
>> Barclay, Daniel wrote:
>>
>> > [...] could
>> > > be said for your HTML-spewing MUA.
>> >
>> > What that heck are you talking about? My message was sent in plain
>> > text, not
>>
Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 16:52:25 -0400
> "Barclay, Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello Daniel,
>
>> What that heck are you talking about? My message was sent in plain
>> text, not HTML.
>
> In fact, Daniel, your messages to this list are coming through as
> plain text w
On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 16:52:25 -0400
"Barclay, Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Daniel,
> What that heck are you talking about? My message was sent in plain
> text, not HTML.
In fact, Daniel, your messages to this list are coming through as
plain text with an HTML attachment.
It would see
Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 10:03 -0400, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
>> Paul Johnson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 16:19 +1000, CaT wrote:
>>>
I believe that would be the point the original poster was getting
>> at. If
aptitude is really doing that then it is in the wrong.
>
Thank you for trimming unnecessary quotes.
On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 09:31 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 07/02/08 08:39, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > The main reason I haven't touched those bugs is that there are many
> > more important things to work on. This behavior might be annoying when
> > it h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/02/08 08:39, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 11:09:18AM +0300, Andrei Popescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
>> Not really. See #201842 and #479620. Unfortunately Daniel Burrows still
>> didn't comment on them. Maybe he
On 2008-07-02 08:59 +0200, CaT wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 08:22:59AM +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> Still there should be an option to turn this behavior off, since it is
>> very annoying for people with low bandwith and frequent network
>> problems. In apt-get you can set APT::Get::List-Cle
On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 09:40:00AM +0800, Magicloud wrote:
> Hello,
>
> When I used aptitude, I noticed that aptitude does not have an
> error handling mechanism. When I `aptitude update`, if the network is broken
> (like dns problem, route problem), it can not connect to the server, so i
On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 08:22:59AM +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> Still there should be an option to turn this behavior off, since it is
> very annoying for people with low bandwith and frequent network
> problems. In apt-get you can set APT::Get::List-Cleanup=false to avoid
> erasing the list files
On 2008-07-02 06:46 +0200, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 09:40 +0800, Magicloud wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> When I used aptitude, I noticed that aptitude does not have
>> an error handling mechanism. When I `aptitude update`, if the network
>> is broken (like dns problem, route
On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 09:40 +0800, Magicloud wrote:
> Hello,
>
> When I used aptitude, I noticed that aptitude does not have
> an error handling mechanism. When I `aptitude update`, if the network
> is broken (like dns problem, route problem), it can not connect to the
> server, so it rep
64 matches
Mail list logo
