nmh Workers (date)

nmh Workers (date)

[Thread Index] [Top] [All Lists]

October 23, 2008

'From ' lines (was Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1)), Joel Reicher, 20:47
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), Jeffrey C Honig, 20:36
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), David Levine, 14:49
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), Jeffrey C Honig, 14:41
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), Peter Maydell, 14:20
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), Jon Steinhart, 13:32
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), David Levine, 12:53

October 22, 2008

Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), Jeffrey C Honig, 23:40
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), David Levine, 22:32
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), Jeffrey C Honig, 15:09
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), Peter Maydell, 12:51
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), Jeffrey C Honig, 12:10
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), bergman, 11:28
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), Peter Maydell, 04:00

October 21, 2008

Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), David Levine, 16:53
[Nmh-workers] Re: big thanks, Justin Mason, 12:51
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), bergman, 10:50
Re: [Nmh-workers] utf-8 subject lines again, Peter Maydell, 08:26
Re: [Nmh-workers] stealthily adding header lines?, Joel Reicher, 07:55
[Nmh-workers] utf-8 subject lines again, rader, 07:48
[Nmh-workers] big thanks, rader, 07:12
[Nmh-workers] stealthily adding header lines?, rader, 06:46
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), rader, 06:39
Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), Peter Maydell, 03:20

October 20, 2008

Re: [Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), David Levine, 22:11
Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, Robert Elz, 10:09
Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, rader, 07:04

October 19, 2008

Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, rader, 09:25
Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, Jerry Peek, 09:02
Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, rader, 00:18

October 18, 2008

Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, Peter Maydell, 20:38
Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, rader, 13:36
Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, rader, 11:00
Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, Jerry Peek, 10:17
[Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, rader, 10:07

October 17, 2008

[Nmh-workers] 128 byte field name limit in NAMESZ breaks scan(1), bergman, 17:33

October 10, 2008

[Nmh-workers] RFC 2047 implementation, Luca Ottaviano, 13:13