Re: Bad autogeneration of Reply-to

Article View: gnu.emacs.gnus

Article #849

#849

From: Karl Kleinpaste
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 1990 20:37

3 lines
677 bytes

There are two responses, I think.  One is that you shouldn't be
bothering with a Reply-To: if the From: line is correct.  The second
is that it comes from (I believe) mail-default-reply-to.

Technical Details

Message-ID: <KARL.90Jan2153705@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu!karl

References: <JLEVINE.90Jan2111442@crash.oracle.com>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu!karl
From: karl@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste)
Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.gnus
Subject: Re: Bad autogeneration of Reply-to
Message-ID: <KARL.90Jan2153705@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Date: 2 Jan 90 20:37:05 GMT
References: <JLEVINE.90Jan2111442@crash.oracle.com>
Sender: news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Organization: Ohio State Computer Science
Lines: 3

Reply to Parent Message