From: Greg C. <chi...@co...> - 2007-04-09 18:15:18
|
On 2007-4-9 17:00 UTC, Julien Lecomte wrote: > On 09/04/2007 17:21, Greg Chicares wrote to the MinGW Users List: > [...] >> Does this update the findings that you posted on >> 2007-3-29 12:23 UTC and 2007-3-30 13:00 UTC, or >> is it an accidental duplicate? > > I never got those original postings! I am still trying to find out why; > whether it was (sill is?) a smtp/ISP problem or a SF mailing list problem. In recent months, I've occasionally noticed others here replying to a message that I never receive. I've wondered whether that might be a sf.net problem; I've confirmed that my ISP isn't blocking the original messages. It happens rarely here, but never on any other mailing list. However, I always get all my own postings echoed back. Comparing your 2007-4-9 15:13 UTC and 2007-3-30 13:00 UTC messages shows that the message bodies are identical except for a few blank lines. As for headers, though, the newer one had... X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by sourceforge.net. ...while the older one had... X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by sourceforge.net. [...] 1.0 FORGED_RCVD_HELO Received: contains a forged HELO ...but of course I received both from sf.net. Above those headers, your older message had these, which I suppose were added upstream of sf.net: Received: from mail.lusis.fr (stephanie [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (MailServerLusis) with ESMTP id 192AB2C3E7 for <min...@li...>; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:03:32 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on stephanie X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.8 but I see nothing like that in your newer message. |