Article View: comp.mail.misc
Article #1773Re: Bogus .UUCP addresses under SCO (TRN TRN TRN !!!)
From: J G Miller
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 1990 00:10
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 1990 00:10
15 lines
1320 bytes
1320 bytes
In article <373@stephsf.stephsf.com> wengland@stephsf.stephsf.com
(Bill England) writes:
> The Reply-To: line is now obsolete anyway! Look at the header
> and see how redundant a Reply-To: line would be. The solution is
> to NOT include a Reply_To: line in your mail header. ( Removing
> this also requires that you have the rn source and recompile. )
Doesn't this version of rn allow one to specify one's Reply-To address
through the use of the MAILHEADER environment setting?
--
J G Miller telephone: (519) 679-2111 extension 6325
Room 024, Chemistry Building InterNet: <a4346@uwocc1.uwo.CA>
University of Western Ontario NetNorth: <A4346@UWOCC1.BITNET>
LONDON, Ontario, N6A 5B7 mailpath: {uunet!watmath,utai}!ria!a4346
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1089@ria.ccs.uwo.ca>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!ria!millerReferences:
<1990Oct1.011018.10124@mthvax.cs.miami.edu> <373@stephsf.stephsf.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!ria!miller From: miller@ria.ccs.uwo.ca (J G Miller) Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: Bogus .UUCP addresses under SCO (TRN TRN TRN !!!) Summary: what about MAILHEADER environment setting Message-ID: <1089@ria.ccs.uwo.ca> Date: 5 Oct 90 00:10:34 GMT References: <1990Oct1.011018.10124@mthvax.cs.miami.edu> <373@stephsf.stephsf.com> Reply-To: J G Miller <miller@ria.ccs.uwo.CA> Followup-To: comp.mail.misc Organization: University of Western Ontario, LONDON, ON Lines: 15