samperi@mancol.UUCP (Dominick Samperi) (02/03/88)
When a mail reply to an article is send via the rn 'r' command, it seems that a 'yes' response to the question about including the contents of .signature results in the contents of this file being included twice. I'm running patchlevel 14 of the news software. Does anybody have a fix for this problem? (A work-around is to respond 'no' to the question about including .signature, and it WILL be included once.) -- Dominick Samperi, Manhattan College, NYC manhat!samperi@NYU.EDU ihnp4!cmcl2!manhat!samperi (that's an ell in cmcl2) ihnp4!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!samperi
max@trinity.uucp (Max Hauser) (02/04/88)
In article <261@mancol.UUCP> samperi@mancol.UUCP (Dominick Samperi) writes: >When a mail reply to an article is send via the rn 'r' command, it seems >that a 'yes' response to the question about including the contents of >.signature results in the contents of this file being included twice. >... (A work-around is to respond 'no' to the question about >including .signature, and it WILL be included once.) To this point let me add only that a lot of people must never check their own postings after sending them out, because an awful lot of articles have appeared in recent months with their long and clever signature lines included twice, whatever the cause. Looks very swift, kind of like someone driving for twenty miles with their turn signal flashing. Really emphasizes the impact of that clever signature. M. Hauser, UC-Berkeley
pokey@well.UUCP (Jef Poskanzer) (02/18/88)
In the referenced message, max@trinity.UUCP (Max Hauser) wrote: }In article <261@mancol.UUCP> samperi@mancol.UUCP (Dominick Samperi) writes: }>When a mail reply to an article is send via the rn 'r' command, it seems }>that a 'yes' response to the question about including the contents of }>.signature results in the contents of this file being included twice. } }To this point let me add only that a lot of people must never check }their own postings after sending them out, because an awful lot of }articles have appeared in recent months with their long and clever }signature lines included twice, whatever the cause. Looks very swift, }kind of like someone driving for twenty miles with their turn signal }flashing. Really emphasizes the impact of that clever signature. Ay-yup. I posted a complete and permanent solution to double signatures last year. Summary: since processing of .signature is inconsistant and random, don't use .signature -- move the file to .mysignature and include it yourself. To do the inclusion automatically, simply make your own copies of the Pnews and Rnmail scripts and edit them. Side benefit: when you modify the scripts, you can get rid of all the stupid "Are you sure? Are you really really sure?" bullstuff. Side benefit 2: this defeats the fascist and stupid 4-line signature limit. --- Jef Jef Poskanzer jef@lbl-rtsg.arpa ...well!pokey What you don't know can hurt you, only you won't know it.
heiby@falkor.UUCP (Ron Heiby) (02/19/88)
Jef Poskanzer (pokey@well.UUCP) writes: | and include it yourself. To do the inclusion automatically, simply | make your own copies of the Pnews and Rnmail scripts and edit them. | | --- | Jef | | Jef Poskanzer jef@lbl-rtsg.arpa ...well!pokey | What you don't know can hurt you, only you won't know it. If you're going to go to all the trouble, why not do it right? Signatures begin with the five character sequence " --(SP) " In case you missed it, that was a newline character, followed by two dash or minus signs, followed by a space, followed by a newline. Then should come your signature. Some people (not me) use the standard signature lead-in in search strings. -- Ron Heiby, heiby@mcdchg.UUCP Moderator: comp.newprod & comp.unix "Intel architectures build character."
pokey@well.UUCP (System Operator) (02/21/88)
In the referenced message, heiby@mcdchg.UUCP (Ron Heiby) wrote: }If you're going to go to all the trouble, why not do it right? }Signatures begin with the five character sequence " }--(SP) }" } }In case you missed it, that was a newline character, followed by two }dash or minus signs, followed by a space, followed by a newline. Then }should come your signature. Some people (not me) use the standard }signature lead-in in search strings. Heh heh heh. I was all set to flame this obnoxious self-appointed network policeman, but when I saw what my automatic signature generator had produced for me, I decided to leave it at that. See below. --- Jef Jef Poskanzer jef@lbl-rtsg.arpa ...well!pokey Anything not worth doing is not worth doing well.
barnett@vdsvax.steinmetz.ge.com (Bruce G. Barnett) (02/23/88)
In article <129@falkor.UUCP> heiby@mcdchg.UUCP (Ron Heiby) writes: |Some people (not me) use the standard |signature lead-in in search strings. I use it as a value to rn's PAGESTOP variable. That way on a low-speed terminal you can stop the screen before displaying the signature 'artwork'. I wish everyone included this in their signatures. Especially the people who have 20 line 'signatures' that are included twice to make a one-line comment. SHeesh! -- Bruce G. Barnett <barnett@ge-crd.ARPA> <barnett@steinmetz.UUCP> uunet!steinmetz!barnett
tale@pawl13.pawl.rpi.edu (David C Lawrence) (02/24/88)
>Side benefit 2: this defeats the fascist and stupid 4-line signature >limit. What's this about four line limits? I know that it is more polite to keep it short, but is there some sort of hard limit? And what is this about <newline>--<space,newline>, and searching for same? *!* "Those who find they have nothing to go out of their way for soon find they have nothing at all." -- Tale Laslingis, during the Fourth History. EMAIL: tale@rpitsmts.bitnet, tale%mts.rpi.edu@rpitsgw, tale@pawl.rpi.edu THE HORN: (518)276-7214, (201)383-9414 during academic recess. DISCLAIMER: Who needs disclaimers when it's USENET policy?