> "Henry" == Henry Olders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Henry> the message I'm trying to post comes from Mail 1.3.9, Mac
Henry> OS 10.3.5, with mail preferences set to use plain text for
Henry> message composition. I don't understand where the unicode
Henry> is supposed to be com
After a couple of months with no problems, today my messages to a
mailing list appear to be getting turfed by mailman.
Mailman 2.1.1, yellow dog linux 3.0.1, postfix
Maillog indicates the message goes to Mailman.
The Mailman error log has:
Oct 11 22:50:15 2004 (953) Uncaught runner exception: dec
I have a list for which the Subject Prefix is not appearing. The messages are going
through, but the [Subject Prefix] is not appearing in the Subject of the messages.
I've not had this problem before, and I don't find anything pertinent in the FAQ. Is
there anything that affects this besides
This directive seems to be working for me:
RedirectMatch ^/mailman[/]*$ http://example.com/mailman/listinfo
-Matt
At 10/11/2004 05:05 PM, Matthew England wrote:
However, I've tried a variety of alternative httpd.conf directives with no
success (or at least not in all scenarios). I want URLs to
h
Yes, the "RedirectMatch" was causing my problems.
However, I've tried a variety of alternative httpd.conf directives with no
success (or at least not in all scenarios). I want URLs to
http://example.com/mailman to auto-expand to
http://example.com/mailman/listinfo ...without having the problems
Matthew England wrote:
>
>I'm sure this is a FAQ (unless my Mailman configuration is broken), but I
>could not find it listed in the FAQ search engine:
>
>I find that I can not access my Mailman list (the one recommended by
>INSTALL as well as per the default listinfo sentence: "If you are havin
An interesting add-on to this point:
The following URL *does* work as expected:
https://example.com/mailman/admin/mailman/general
This displays the "General Options Section" of the admin interface. Not
that it requires no uppercase "Mailman," apparently because of the extra
"/general" at the end
Hello,
I'm sure this is a FAQ (unless my Mailman configuration is broken), but I
could not find it listed in the FAQ search engine:
I find that I can not access my Mailman list (the one recommended by
INSTALL as well as per the default listinfo sentence: "If you are having
trouble using the l
Hi there...
from allmost two years we're using mailman as our solution of mailing lists.
So far so good, but now we're having some trobles.
There is one message that's corrupting the list of messages. We're talking
about 5 lists administrated by mailman.
Somehow a message arives to qfiles,
Chad Leigh wrote:
>Not related to my own installations of mailman, but I run a few lists
>on an ISP I have an account at (for historical reasons). The lists
>were originally majordomo lists and when they moved to Mailman the
>hostname changed from lists.domain.tld to mailman.domain.tld . And
On Oct 11, 2004, at 1:49 PM, Fred Look and Brenda Carson wrote:
You are aware that the "list owner" and "list moderator" are now two
seperate
identities and that after your upgrade you need to access the admin
page for
each list and fill in the email address for "moderator" which will be
blank.
Hey mailman-users list:
Thank you, your quick and helpful response kept us rocking
and left me looking good. I certainly appreciate your help
with getting this back up and running. I'm bookmarking that
faq for later use.
-- Hugh
Hey everyone:
Thanks to the swift response of folks on the
[E
Not related to my own installations of mailman, but I run a few lists
on an ISP I have an account at (for historical reasons). The lists
were originally majordomo lists and when they moved to Mailman the
hostname changed from lists.domain.tld to mailman.domain.tld . And
then a forwarding link
You are aware that the "list owner" and "list moderator" are now two seperate
identities and that after your upgrade you need to access the admin page for
each list and fill in the email address for "moderator" which will be blank. ?
this happened to me too when i upgraded to 2.1.5
Fred
On T
On Oct 11, 2004, at 1:34 PM, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
On Oct 11, 2004, at 12:51 PM, Richard Barrett wrote:
Any thoughts?
This is a really dumb/off the wall thought. Were the mail aliases for
your lists regenerated as part of the MM 2.0.x to 2.1.5 upgrade, the
old aliases replaced with n
On Oct 11, 2004, at 12:51 PM, Richard Barrett wrote:
Any thoughts?
This is a really dumb/off the wall thought. Were the mail aliases for
your lists regenerated as part of the MM 2.0.x to 2.1.5 upgrade, the
old aliases replaced with new ones and the aliases database rebuilt?
Good thought. However
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>Our mailman installation has been serving us well since it
>was installed and tricked out in August or early September.
>Last night I started getting reports that email was not
>getting through.
>
>I have attempted multiple lists on the server with similar
>results:
>
>*
Steve and Tim:
Your copy of my email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jon Ringuette (iMeme administrator)
-- Hugh Esco
404-806-0480
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Greetings:
Our mailman installation has been serving us well since it
was installed and tricked out in August or early September.
Last ni
On 11 Oct 2004, at 18:54, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
Hi
I have a mailman installation I am responisible for (2.1.5). The list
owners do not get any administrative emails (like pending requests).
However, the same email addresses subscribed to lists get the list
traffic fine and the peo
On 11 Oct 2004, at 18:54, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
Hi
I have a mailman installation I am responisible for (2.1.5). The list
owners do not get any administrative emails (like pending requests).
However, the same email addresses subscribed to lists get the list
traffic fine and the peo
Chad Leigh wrote:
>
>I have a mailman installation I am responisible for (2.1.5). The list
>owners do not get any administrative emails (like pending requests).
>However, the same email addresses subscribed to lists get the list
>traffic fine and the people get all their normal emails ok. So
Hi
I have a mailman installation I am responisible for (2.1.5). The list
owners do not get any administrative emails (like pending requests).
However, the same email addresses subscribed to lists get the list
traffic fine and the people get all their normal emails ok. So the
problem seems to
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Sapiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Fred Look and Brenda Carson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 8:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman URL and listinfo
> Fred Look and Brenda Carson wrote:
> >
> >well at first
23 matches
Mail list logo
