John Summerfield([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said:
> David P James wrote:
>
> >On Thu 5 August 2004 20:49, John Summerfield wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Matt Perry wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, John Summerfield wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Why would anyone want to?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>Why would anyone want to what?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Retain old sa headers? The only ones valid for sorting are those
> >>injected by your own SA.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Good grief - you started this sub-thread by claiming that the only SA
> >headers you saw were your own in a way that suggested that the list
> >wasn't being processed by SA.
> >
>
> That's not quite so. Someone said it's obvious that the list uses
> spamassassin, whereas in fact that's not so. I don't see headers
> inserted by Debian.
>
Well if your right John, who do you think put these headers on
your message?
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-lists.debian.org_2004_07_08_01
(2004-01-11) on murphy.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=LDOSUBSCRIBER autolearn=no
version=2.63-lists.debian.org_2004_07_08_01
X-Spam-Level:
Resent-Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Looks like the list to me unless my installation od SA is using
murphy.debain.org.
BTW, I am still seeing
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
on your mail. I guess you Thunderbird is still the problem?
Wayne
--
To the systems programmer, users and applications serve only to provide
a test load.
_______________________________________________________
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
