On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:33:57 -0500 (CDT), David Young in
gmane.linux.debian.user wrote:
> On Fri, August 28, 2009 9:14 am, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> On 2009-08-28 16:07 +0200, David Young wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, August 28, 2009 8:52 am, Sven Joachim wrote:
And please refrain from hijacking threads
On 2009-08-28 11:30, Patrick Wiseman wrote:
[snip]
I just discovered that gmail does not include the References header if
you reply to an email and change the subject line. I wonder if that's
a deliberate "feature".
to hate gmail!
--
Obsession with "preserving cultural heritage" is a racist
On 2009-08-28 18:30 +0200, Patrick Wiseman wrote:
> I just discovered that gmail does not include the References header if
> you reply to an email and change the subject line. I wonder if that's
> a deliberate "feature".
>From what I've heard of gmail so far, it probably is. :-/
Sven
--
To U
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2009-08-28 17:04 +0200, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 09:33:57AM -0500, David Young wrote:
>>> On Fri, August 28, 2009 9:14 am, Sven Joachim wrote:
>>> > No, look at the "References" header in your messageน. Whe
On 2009-08-28 17:04 +0200, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 09:33:57AM -0500, David Young wrote:
>> On Fri, August 28, 2009 9:14 am, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> > No, look at the "References" header in your message¹. When starting a
>> > new thread, this header does not exist, be
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 09:33:57AM -0500, David Young wrote:
> On Fri, August 28, 2009 9:14 am, Sven Joachim wrote:
> > On 2009-08-28 16:07 +0200, David Young wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, August 28, 2009 8:52 am, Sven Joachim wrote:
> >>> And please refrain from hijacking threads in the future. When yo
On Fri, August 28, 2009 9:14 am, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2009-08-28 16:07 +0200, David Young wrote:
>
>> On Fri, August 28, 2009 8:52 am, Sven Joachim wrote:
>>> And please refrain from hijacking threads in the future. When you
>>> have
>>> a problem not already discussed here, write a new messag
On 2009-08-28 16:07 +0200, David Young wrote:
> On Fri, August 28, 2009 8:52 am, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> And please refrain from hijacking threads in the future. When you
>> have
>> a problem not already discussed here, write a new message instead of
>> replying to an unrelated one.
>
> I apprecia
* Vineet Kumar ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> You could just add a "sleep 10s" to the beginning of
> /etc/init.d/fetchmail, and tune the 10 to whatever number is just large
> enough so that sendmail will have started but just small enough so that
> the delay isn't too obnoxious each time you boot. (S
* Mike Pfleger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [010905 19:55]:
> * Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > Give it a later number in /etc/rc?.d (probably /etc/rc2.d) than the
> > sendmail init script. They're started in sequence by /etc/init.d/rc.
>
> Hey Colin.
>
> Yeah, that was my first thought. I
* Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Give it a later number in /etc/rc?.d (probably /etc/rc2.d) than the
> sendmail init script. They're started in sequence by /etc/init.d/rc.
Hey Colin.
Yeah, that was my first thought. It was already S99fetchmail in the
rc2.d and rc3.d directories. The
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 10:36:48AM -0700, Mike Pfleger wrote:
> Yup; I just hijacked another thread, but my question is related. If I
> want to have system-wide fetchmail started with the usual script in:
> /etc/init.d/
> but have it wait to make sure that sendmail is actually running before
* ktb ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> "sleep" is what your looking for. "sleep 10s" to wait 10 seconds.
>
> Take a look at the fetchmail man page. Fetchmail has several exit codes so
> you can write your script to say, 'wait 15m when your isp doesn't respond
> before trying again' and other fun
13 matches
Mail list logo
