[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging
From: |
Federico Di Gregorio |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging |
Date: |
Tue, 26 Aug 2003 00:34:44 +0200 |
Il lun, 2003-08-25 alle 14:15, MJ Ray ha scritto:
> On 2003-08-23 04:58:04 +0100 Jonathan Walther <address@hidden>
> wrote:
> > Balogna. 'L' (list-reply-only) in mutt took one look at your message,
> > which contained all the List-* headers, and it said "No list found!"
> > Why are we expected to use bullshit software like this?
>
> I've no idea. mutt is another email client which has no List-*
> handling. Given that I thought some hackers used mutt, I was
mutt _has_ list handling. use the L key *after* configuring the lists in
your mutt rc file. it is incredible how many people on this list don't
have even the skill necessary to use google to search for a FAQ.
--
Federico Di Gregorio
Debian GNU/Linux Developer address@hidden
INIT.D Developer address@hidden
God is real. Unless declared integer. -- Anonymous FORTRAN programmer
signature.asc
Description: Questa parte del messaggio รจ firmata
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, MJ Ray, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Mark A. Flacy, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Andrew Suffield, 2003/08/26
- Message not available
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Andrew Suffield, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, MJ Ray, 2003/08/26
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Miles Bader, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Robert Collins, 2003/08/27
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Miles Bader, 2003/08/27
- [Gnu-arch-users] Specifying protocols [was: the dangers of no reply-to munging], Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/08/27
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, MJ Ray, 2003/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging,
Federico Di Gregorio <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging, Jonathan Walther, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Andrew Suffield, 2003/08/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, MJ Ray, 2003/08/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Andrew Suffield, 2003/08/26
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, MJ Ray, 2003/08/22
- [Gnu-arch-users] something _interesting_ for (Re: ... no reply-to munging ...), Tom Lord, 2003/08/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Jonathan Walther, 2003/08/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/08/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Jonathan Walther, 2003/08/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging; Xouvert update, Tom Lord, 2003/08/23