Eberhard Moenkeberg a écrit :
Hi,
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, jdd wrote:
Kenneth Schneider a écrit :
I do see your point now but
I don't think so.
the eberhart post make me feel there is more than the reply-to problem.
if he receives twice _all_ the posts of the thread, this is _not_ a
reply-t
Hello,
Marcus Meissner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-08-15]:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 03:07:17PM -0500, Rene Salmon wrote:
> > Hi list,
> >
> > I have some binaries (commercial software) that requires glibc 2.3 to
> > run. Is there any way that I can get a glibc 2.3 version installed on a
> > sus
Hi,
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, jdd wrote:
Kenneth Schneider a écrit :
I do see your point now but
I don't think so.
the eberhart post make me feel there is more than the reply-to problem.
if he receives twice _all_ the posts of the thread, this is _not_ a reply-to
problem...
You should read
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 03:07:17PM -0500, Rene Salmon wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I have some binaries (commercial software) that requires glibc 2.3 to
> run. Is there any way that I can get a glibc 2.3 version installed on a
> suse 10.1 box somewhere so that i can point my binaries to it?
Our glibc
Kenneth Schneider a écrit :
I do see your point now but
I don't think so.
the eberhart post make me feel there is more than the
reply-to problem.
if he receives twice _all_ the posts of the thread, this is
_not_ a reply-to problem...
jdd
--
http://www.dodin.net
http://dodin.org/galerie_
Hi list,
I have some binaries (commercial software) that requires glibc 2.3 to
run. Is there any way that I can get a glibc 2.3 version installed on a
suse 10.1 box somewhere so that i can point my binaries to it?
Thanks
Rene
--
-
--
Rene Salmon
Tulane University
C
On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 20:13 +0200, jdd wrote:
> Eberhard Moenkeberg a écrit :
>
> > From that moment on you will receive the whole thread twice.
>
> I of course don't receive twice the thread. but this lead me
> to a question:
>
> who do receive _all_ the messages twice?
>
> I understand _thi
* Patrick Shanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-15-06 15:29]:
> * Philipp Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-15-06 11:04]:
> >
> > Had you honoured the Reply-To set in the mail it would have gone the
> > right place, i.e. *not* to the list.
> >
>
>
> Hummm, there was _none_ in the mail I rec'd
O
* Philipp Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-15-06 11:04]:
>
> Had you honoured the Reply-To set in the mail it would have gone the
> right place, i.e. *not* to the list.
>
Hummm, there was _none_ in the mail I rec'd
--
Patrick ShanahanRegistered Linux User #207535
htt
Hi,
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, jdd wrote:
Eberhard Moenkeberg a écrit :
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, jdd wrote:
Eberhard Moenkeberg a écrit :
From that moment on you will receive the whole thread twice.
of course not. anybody can see this (or did you subscribe twice on two
different adresses?)
You
Eberhard Moenkeberg a écrit :
Hi,
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, jdd wrote:
Eberhard Moenkeberg a écrit :
From that moment on you will receive the whole thread twice.
of course not. anybody can see this (or did you subscribe twice on two
different adresses?)
You do not know what you are speaking
Hi,
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, jdd wrote:
Notice this: if somebody answer to the list & the personal adress and _you_
try to answer to his message, you end up with _three_ adresses, the original
one, the sender one and the list one. so it's really better, when you answer,
to remove the unwanted adr
Hi,
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, jdd wrote:
Eberhard Moenkeberg a écrit :
From that moment on you will receive the whole thread twice.
of course not. anybody can see this (or did you subscribe twice on two
different adresses?)
You do not know what you are speaking about.
I have just gone throug
Eberhard Moenkeberg a écrit :
From that moment on you will receive the whole thread twice.
I of course don't receive twice the thread. but this lead me
to a question:
who do receive _all_ the messages twice?
I understand _this_ could upset someone, but is so we must
find why, this is def
Eberhard Moenkeberg a écrit :
From that moment on you will receive the whole thread twice.
Cheers -e
of course not. anybody can see this (or did you subscribe
twice on two different adresses?)
jdd
--
http://www.dodin.net
http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html
http://lucien.dodin.
Hi,
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, jdd wrote:
Kenneth Schneider a écrit :
I'm on three suse lists that generate over 200 emails a day and now you
want me to receive over 400 because your email client does not work
correctly. This is just plain stupid. Use a client that works with
lists.
you wont recei
Kenneth Schneider a écrit :
I'm on three suse lists that generate over 200 emails a day and now you
want me to receive over 400 because your email client does not work
correctly. This is just plain stupid. Use a client that works with
lists.
you wont receive _all_ the mails twice. only the ones
- Original Message
From: Henne Vogelsang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: opensuse@opensuse.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 3:00:25 AM
Subject: [opensuse] VOTE
[ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
[X] The mailinglist server
Henne Vogelsang ha scritto:
> [X] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> [ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> header at all. (current setup)
> [ ] I dont care.
--
Lorenzo `paulatz' Paulatto
Trieste
``G
On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 12:57 +0200, jdd wrote:
> Tilman Vogel a écrit :
>
> > Ok, I am using Mozilla Thunderbird Version 1.5.0.5 (20060725). Could you
> > please elaborate on how I can get around the following procedure in
> > order to get decent replying behaviour?
> >
> > 1) Click "reply all"
>
> [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
[ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
header at all. (current setup)
[x] I dont care.
-
To u
On Tuesday 15 August 2006 06:00, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
> [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> [ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> header at all. (current setup)
> [x] I dont care.
--
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, Anders Johansson wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 August 2006 17:00, Philipp Thomas wrote:
> > * Christoph Thiel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [20060815 13:11]:
> > > > [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> >
> > Somehow many people missed
Henne Vogelsang wrote:
> [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> [ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> header at all. (current setup)
> [X] I dont care.
>
Darren
-
On Tuesday 15 August 2006 17:00, Philipp Thomas wrote:
> * Christoph Thiel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [20060815 13:11]:
> > > [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
>
> Somehow many people missed the Reply-To on Henne's mail that should have
> made shure the
* Randall R Schulz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [20060815 14:36]:
>
> Since you didn't specify personal replies, I'm replying to the list.
Had you honoured the Reply-To set in the mail it would have gone the right
place, i.e. *not* to th
* Christoph Thiel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [20060815 13:11]:
> > [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
Somehow many people missed the Reply-To on Henne's mail that should have
made shure the mail does *not* go to the list ...
I can't comment on the other mail clients, but I do take issue with your
portrayal of KMail/Kontact...
Am Dienstag, 15. August 2006 09:38 schrieb Clayton:
> First my disclaimer I don't really care one way or the other how
> the Reply-to is set on the list. It's been set to reply to the perso
Henne Vogelsang wrote:
[X] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
[ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
header at all. (current setup)
[ ] I dont care.
-
Am Dienstag, 15. August 2006 12:00 schrieb Henne Vogelsang:
> [x] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> [ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> header at all. (current setup)
> [ ] I dont care.
Cheers,
Pete
>> I will not count votes that go to the list and i will not count the
>> opinions you gave since yesterday.
>
>Kind of silly not to put the instructions in the ballot posting, wasn't
>it?
So you are not paying enough attention to the list to be taken seriously
for voting :-)
Jan Engelhardt
-
On Tuesday 15 August 2006 05:41, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Randall R Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-15-06 08:38]:
> > Since you didn't specify personal replies, I'm replying to the
> > list.
>
> Henne wrote:
>
> I will send a mail at 12:00 CEST today that you can answer directly
> to me.
>
> I wi
* Randall R Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-15-06 08:38]:
>
> Since you didn't specify personal replies, I'm replying to the list.
>
Henne wrote:
I will send a mail at 12:00 CEST today that you can answer directly to
me.
I will count only mails that come from subscribers and are replys
to the
On Tuesday 15 August 2006 03:00, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
> [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> [x] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> header at all. (current setup)
> [ ] I dont care.
Since you didn't
> El Martes, 15 de Agosto de 2006 12:00, Henne Vogelsang escribi?:
> > [X] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> > that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> > [ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> > header at all. (current setup)
> > [ ] I dont car
El Martes, 15 de Agosto de 2006 12:00, Henne Vogelsang escribió:
> [X] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> [ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> header at all. (current setup)
> [ ] I dont care.
--
Víct
Henne Vogelsang schrieb:
> [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> [ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> header at all. (current setup)
> [X] I dont care.
regards,
JBScout aka Thomy
---
Am Dienstag, 15. August 2006 12:00 schrieb Henne Vogelsang:
> [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> [ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> header at all. (current setup)
> [ X] I dont care.
--
mit freu
>>> Rebecca Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 08/15/06 1:01 PM >>>
On Monday 14 August 2006 23:54, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Monday, August 14, 2006 at 23:01:30, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
> > would everone be able to live with a majority decision about this
> > matter? Looks like not all people tru
Am Dienstag, 15. August 2006 12:00 schrieb Henne Vogelsang:
> [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> [ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> header at all. (current setup)
> [X] I dont care.
--
P4i845GV
Em Terça, 15 de Agosto de 2006 08:38, o Clayton escreveu:
> Even within these "list aware" mailing clients you have to know that
> they are list aware... if you click reply-to in KMail in a mail from
> this list you get the sender.. not the list address. You have to know
> that you press L or you
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
> [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> [ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> header at all. (current setup)
> [x] I dont care.
Regards
Christoph
-
Tilman Vogel a écrit :
Ok, I am using Mozilla Thunderbird Version 1.5.0.5 (20060725). Could you
please elaborate on how I can get around the following procedure in
order to get decent replying behaviour?
1) Click "reply all"
2) Remove "To: Bernhard Walle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
3) Change "CC: open
On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 12:00 +0200, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
> [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> [ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> header at all. (current setup)
> [X] I dont care.
--
Keith Kastor
Op maandag 14 augustus 2006 23:01, schreef Henne Vogelsang:
> Hi,
>
> would everone be able to live with a majority decision about this
> matter? Looks like not all people trust me enough to decide this based
> on the arguments presented. I would do this by mail to me. Do you trust
> me enough to c
Am Dienstag 15 August 2006 12:00 schrieb Henne Vogelsang:
> [ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
> that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
> [X] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
> header at all. (current setup)
> [ ] I dont care.
--
MfG
Rolf Ma
On Monday 14 August 2006 23:54, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Monday, August 14, 2006 at 23:01:30, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
> > would everone be able to live with a majority decision about this
> > matter? Looks like not all people trust me enough to decide this based
> > on the arguments prese
[ ] The mailinglist server should insert a Reply-To header
that points to the listaddress. (old setup)
[ ] The mailinglist server should not insert a Reply-To
header at all. (current setup)
[ ] I dont care.
pgp6cgQc7MSjA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hi,
ok here we go. Entitled to a vote is everyone that was subscribed on the
list by 00:01 CEST today. That makes 926 votes. I would like to have at
least 10% turnout at the election (92 votes). I will send a mail at
12:00 CEST today that you can answer directly to me. I will count only
mails that
First my disclaimer I don't really care one way or the other how
the Reply-to is set on the list. It's been set to reply to the person
rather than the list for years (on the suse-linux-e list), and I'm
kind of used to it... but... I do have some thoughts/observations on
this. (and I'll proba
Am Montag, 14. August 2006 23:27 schrieb Kenneth Schneider:
> On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 23:01 +0200, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > would everone be able to live with a majority decision about this
> > matter? Looks like not all people trust me enough to decide this based
> > on the arguments p
51 matches
Mail list logo
