> "e" == ed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
e> parameter. Apache / IIS would be significantly confused for sure. &'s are
e> not valid in HTML file names as they specify a part of a parameter list on
e> the url.
If the code isn't URI escaping things when needed, then it is a
security breach wa
I'm getting more confused by the second...
I've removed the list and re-created it without the "&" in the name.
What happend is I'm transfering from an old server to a new mailman
server. The list created just fine and displays just fine. It seems
postfix is recieving the list name seperated as tw
While this is all true to some degree, don't overlook something even more
obvious with regards to mailman, the web interface in trying to display
that list name would actually be trying to display a page that takes a
parameter. Apache / IIS would be significantly confused for sure. &'s are
not
> "SW" == Simon White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
SW> The & in shell has a special meaning, it would have to be "escaped",
SW> because
If you read Business Week, the "Tech & You" column has a comment email
address of tech&[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just because the unix shell does something with & do
03-Dec-03 at 10:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> I have a list with a & in the name, is this a dis-allowed character in
> the list names?
>
> I have recieved a message back indicating a problem with the use of
> the "&" see below:
> Final-Recipient: rfc822; arts&[EMAIL PROTECTED
I have a list with a & in the name, is this a dis-allowed character in
the list names?
I have recieved a message back indicating a problem with the use of
the "&" see below:
Final-Recipient: rfc822; arts&[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0
Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; Command died wit