At 6:11 PM -0500 2004/04/08, Paul H Byerly wrote:
Pardon my aggression. I have asked this question half a dozen
times in the last year, and up until now the only responses have been
private e-mails saying "If you figure it out, tell me how to do it.
My understanding Mailman and e-mail in
Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
This is wrong. I should have read the page carefully. ;-)
You can pass the second test by leaving pass_mime_types blank.
That is how I read it. Since the first test supposedly only removed
types listed, is it then not logical to assume that leaving both empty and
not co
Richard B wrote:
Even a Texan would not believe that two people making an assertion
without presenting supporting evidence makes it the truth.
My point was that it's reproducible.
In either both of your cases do the test messages contain a
X-Content-Filtered-By: header
If filtering is on
On 8 Apr 2004, at 02:05, Paul H Byerly wrote:
Richard B wrote:
You are asserting that your tests show some problem exists but from a
quick look at it, the code concerned is not obviously defective.
Well unless it's a Texas conspiracy, TC has taken it past an
empty assertion.
Even a Texan wo
Richard B wrote:
You are asserting that your tests show some problem exists but from a
quick look at it, the code concerned is not obviously defective.
Well unless it's a Texas conspiracy, TC has taken it past an empty
assertion.
Can you give me a yes or no on my reasoning? Should turn
texas critter wrote:
When you posted about this the other day, I did some brief tests with 2.1.3
and I got the same wrong results as you did. So I guess it's a bug, and
it's in both versions.
Thanks TC, this is the first time anyone has confirmed this (I owe
you some catnip now). I had the
