Re: [Mutt] #3090: Mutt removes In-Reply-To header field

To: alexander@xxxxxxxxxxx, agriffis@xxxxxxxxx, pdmef@xxxxxxx, vincent@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Mutt] #3090: Mutt removes In-Reply-To header field
From: Mutt <fleas@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 01:00:24 -0000
Cc: mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <040.89dbaf19cdfc0d61effc76fea0b7e739@xxxxxxxx>
List-post: <mailto:mutt-dev@mutt.org>
List-unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@mutt.org, body only "unsubscribe mutt-dev"
Mail-followup-to: fleas@xxxxxxxx
References: <040.89dbaf19cdfc0d61effc76fea0b7e739@xxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: fleas@xxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx

#3090: Mutt removes In-Reply-To header field

Comment (by agriffis):

 ...and as I said in my last sentence, this should really be merged with
 mutt_extract_message_id() so there's only one way that message-ids are
 recognized.  Here's the patch.  Bonus: no longer use strtok() so the input
 string isn't modified.  This replaces all my previous patches in this bug.
 I've tested it for a while and it seems to fix the various problems cited.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://dev.mutt.org/trac/ticket/3090#comment:16>

References:
- [Mutt] #3090: Mutt removes In-Reply-To header field
  - From: Mutt

Prev by Date: Re: [Mutt] #3061: display broken when a mail contains U+FEFF
Next by Date: Re: [Mutt] #2017: mutt_addr_is_user() "null address is assumed to
Previous by thread: Re: [Mutt] #3090: Mutt removes In-Reply-To header field
Next by thread: Re: [Mutt] #3090: Mutt removes In-Reply-To header field
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread