Hello,
One of our list administrators pointed out a problem with one of
his list serves with mailman. He tried to send mail to his list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] but it did not go through but when he sent to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] the mail did go through. This problem did
not appear in our earlier versio
At 8:56 AM -0400 2005-09-02, Darren G Pifer wrote:
>One of our list administrators pointed out a problem with one of
> his list serves with mailman. He tried to send mail to his list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] but it did not go through but when he sent to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] the mail did go th
Hello,
On Fri, 2005-09-02 at 12:08, Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 8:56 AM -0400 2005-09-02, Darren G Pifer wrote:
>
> >One of our list administrators pointed out a problem with one of
> > his list serves with mailman. He tried to send mail to his list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] but it did not go
At 3:12 PM -0400 2005-09-02, Darren G Pifer wrote:
> No, we have been using sendmail 8.13.4 even before we moved mailman
> to the new machine. Do you know what options sendmail may be using
> that is causing recipient name folding?
By default, sendmail is not going to be doing any case
On Fri, 2005-09-02 at 15:27, Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 3:12 PM -0400 2005-09-02, Darren G Pifer wrote:
>
> > No, we have been using sendmail 8.13.4 even before we moved mailman
> > to the new machine. Do you know what options sendmail may be using
> > that is causing recipient name folding?
>
>
At 4:30 PM -0400 2005-09-02, Darren G Pifer wrote:
> Also, the sendmail mailer flag "u" which is being used and according to
> the Bat book causes the case of the user part of the address to remain.
> I also don't see anywhere in the mm-handler script that will do the
> case conversion for us.
Brad Knowles wrote:
>At 4:30 PM -0400 2005-09-02, Darren G Pifer wrote:
>
>> Also, the sendmail mailer flag "u" which is being used and according to
>> the Bat book causes the case of the user part of the address to remain.
>> I also don't see anywhere in the mm-handler script that will do the
