On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 09:20:45PM -0800, James E Wilson wrote:
> Thomas Koenig wrote:
> >any reason why the message
> >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-03/msg00282.html
> >was rejected as spam from gcc-patches, yet accepted on the fortran
> >list?
>
> By the way, I think it is a word of all cap
Thomas Koenig wrote:
any reason why the message
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-03/msg00282.html
was rejected as spam from gcc-patches, yet accepted on the fortran
list?
See
http://www.sourceware.org/lists.html#rbl-sucks
which has a discussion of how the spam filters work, and how to get
ar
Hi,
any reason why the message
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-03/msg00282.html
was rejected as spam from gcc-patches, yet accepted on the fortran
list?
