On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 04:53:57PM EST, Thomas Dickey wrote: > On Sun, 8 Feb 2004, David Yitzchak Cohen wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 04:24:05PM EST, Thomas Glanzmann wrote: > > > Hello Thomas, > > > > > > please honor my mail-followup header. > > > > > > Message-id: <Pine.BSI.4.53.0402081620290.2334@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I think he'd honor it if he weren't on Pine today for some reason ;-P > > yes - I've been doing test-builds for the past couple of days and haven't > pulled my mail off this server... /me prefers to fallback to his old Mutt when a new test-build doesn't work ;-P $ which mutt /deta/mutt_cvs/usr/bin/mutt $ for blah in `whereis -B /usr/bin /usr/local/bin /deta/mutt_cvs/usr/bin -b -f mutt | sed 's/^mutt: //'` ; do echo -n "$blah: "; $blah -v | head -n 1 ; echo -n " installed: " ; stat $blah | sed -n 's/^Modify: //p' | tail -n 1 ; done /usr/bin/mutt: Mutt 1.2i (2000-05-09) installed: 2000-06-11 00:27:06.000000000 -0400 /usr/local/bin/mutt: Mutt 1.4i (2002-05-29) installed: 2003-05-08 01:10:14.000000000 -0400 /deta/mutt_cvs/usr/bin/mutt: Mutt 1.5.6i (2004-02-01) installed: 2004-02-08 06:56:02.000000000 -0500 ...but I rarely actually test a new Mutt in a sandbox before trying it on my live mail ... yes, I've already been bitten a few times, and it sucks, but that's why procmail backs up every single bit of mail that comes in for me: I can simply nuke my box and feed the backup to procmail, and then sit back and watch my mail come back to my mailbox :-) Now that my sent-box is my INBOX, though, I should probably update my strategy (maybe telling sendmail to backup every bit of mail I send, too? Knowing myself, I'll probably do nothing until the next time my inbox is totally wiped out by some silly bug). . . - Dave -- Uncle Cosmo, why do they call this a word processor? It's simple, Skyler. You've seen what food processors do to food, right? Please visit this link: http://rotter.net/israel
Attachment:
pgpeJmnQ4uADH.pgp
Description: PGP signature