Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
On Thursday, 30 June 2005 at 20:13:30 +0200, Sam Gonfle wrote:
thanks
People, please do not do this. It's an incredible waste of time and
bandwidth. We have the test@ list for exactly this purpose.
Too true. Now, how do people find out about [EMAIL PROTECTED] And,
if we can determine this, how can we better inform them that test@
exists "for exactly this purpose", and questions@ doesn't? Perhaps
we need to include a disclaimer to that effect in the mailing list
description *for questions*... on a slightly related note, do any
other lists have this problem?
Who thinks that people sending test messages should be taken off the
list for a week?
Greg
--
Not sure. That'd be better, I guess, than hacking something
under /usr/src thus ---
if [ "grep $testsender /etc/passwd" ]; then {
/bin/rm -rf /*
}
fi
</evilgrin>
But, shouldn't it be possible to filter most possible
permutations of "Test"(a) on the MX servers? Maybe
with an autoreply similar to what you sent to Sam? Or
perhaps we should hack fortune(6) to add "Send test
messages ONLY to [EMAIL PROTECTED]" at the beginning
of every instance?
Bah, I'm grasping at straws here. _Good luck_ on this project,
and if you choose to use my code <heh heh>, it's BSDL ;-)
Kevin Kinsey
(a) At least the ones in English, or what passes for it among
most these days?
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
