Subject: RE: autoconf(9) tree in an odd hardware arrangement
To: Alan Barrett <email@example.com>
From: De Zeurkous <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/25/2007 13:43:11
On Sun, November 25, 2007 13:07, Alan Barrett wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007, De Zeurkous wrote:
> [ a message that was clearly a reply, and that had a Subject
> beginning with "RE:", but that did not have any In-Reply-To or
> References headers.]
> The absence of References and In-Reply-To headers causes your messages
> to appear as if they are not replies. Please fix that. I don't know
> whether you need to switch to different software, or simply configure
> your existing software differently.
# 1 "excuses.h" 1
Due to the fact that I's been a while I had a stable enough system to
entrust configuring any mail crap (including clients, IMAP or not) on
(except for a file server), I'm currectly using SquirrelMail as provided
for by my ISP. I'll ask them (XS4ALL happens to be a /very/ friendly ISP)
to fix it; in the mean time, there's not much I can do (I'm /not/ going to
meddle around with broken xterms, twm, and Lunix on my -server-
-workstation- -desktop- -gaming machine- gaming machine producing
rendering artifacts to use mail(1) on a FreeBSD shell server; it's just
asking for trouble).
Don't misunderstand me: I'll be glad to use a proper client and send
proper headers. However, it just isn't possible /right now/.
> --apb (Alan Barrett)
# Proud -net.kook- IRC bot overengineer
% NetBSD, zsh, twm, nvi and roff junkie
From the fool file:
I don't see why the way people have historically partitioned disks should
dictate which kernels we build and distribute by default in the future.
--Darren Reed (darrenr@NetBSD.org), NetBSD tech-kern