IC97@NTSUVAXA.BITNET (Kevin W. Mullet) (05/31/87)
>From: Art McClinton <ART@MITRE.ARPA> >Subject: duplicate copies >I have started receiving duplicate copies of messages. >I do not think that the problem that forced you to go to digests is solved. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I'm receiving duplicates also... I'd like to put my vote in for a return to the digest format. Personally, I prefer reading one or two lengthy messages to wading through screen after screen of network headers. BTW: Has anyone been able to get the VMSMail "CURRENT/EDIT" command to work? My MAIL$EDIT.COM is written to specs and works fine (using EVE) with all commands except CURR/EDIT, for which it gives the message : %MAIL-E-NOTCALEDT, this command cannot be executed. MAIL$EDIT does not specify a callable editor. Thanks... Digitally, +-+-+-+-+-+ |K|e|v|i|n| +-+-+-+-+-+
LEICHTER-JERRY@YALE.ARPA (05/31/87)
...
Has anyone been able to get the VMSMail "CURRENT/EDIT"
command to work? My MAIL$EDIT.COM is written to specs
and works fine (using EVE) with all commands except
CURR/EDIT, for which it gives the message :
%MAIL-E-NOTCALEDT, this command cannot be executed.
MAIL$EDIT does not specify a callable editor.
Some of the commands in MAIL work only with a CALLABLE editor, not with a
spawned editor. Luckily for you, EVE (well, TPU) IS callable. Try defining
MAIL$EDIT as "CALLABLE_TPU".
-- Jerry
-------tedcrane@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Ted Crane) (06/02/87)
In article <8705302301.AA20507@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> IC97@NTSUVAXA.BITNET (Kevin W. Mullet) writes: > format. Personally, I prefer reading one or two lengthy > messages to wading through screen after screen of network > headers. A vote against digests from this reader. I can't stand the loss of flexibility that comes with a digest. You (and the original submitter) seem to have ignored the fact that the digests often contained duplicate articles (same article in >1 digest, and even the same article >1 times in the same digest!). Plus, the digests arrive out of sequence, you can't easily reply to a single message (how much clutter can be kept out of the public postings when its easier to use the "r" and "R" and reply privately!). And so on.
kenw@noah.arc.CDN.UUCP (06/03/87)
Please, please, do *not* start doing digest format again, as *least* until somebody publishes a way to un-digest them. I can read the digests, but I cannot either save the interesting messages by category, or reply to any of them in a convenient manner. BTW I am using EAN mail v1.0, with 2.0 due out REAL SOON NOW. Whether it will handle digest I don't know, but at least it's X.400 :-). /kenw A L B E R T A Ken Wallewein R E S E A R C H C O U N C I L
MDEBAR@BNANDP11.BITNET.UUCP (06/03/87)
As others have said: lloottss ooff dduupplliiccaattee mmeessaaggeess lloottss ooff dduupplliiccaattee mmeessaaggeess Hence, and for other reasons as well, please come back to the digest format. michel debar fndp computing centre - rue grandgagnage 21 - 5000 namur belgium tel= + 32 81 220631 earn= mdebar%bnandp11.bitnet@wiscvm.wisc.edu
mende@aramis.rutgers.edu.UUCP (06/03/87)
> Please, please, do *not* start doing digest format again, as > *least* until somebody publishes a way to un-digest them. I can read > the digests, but I cannot either save the interesting messages by > category, or reply to any of them in a convenient manner. I believe that GNU emacs has an undigestify option in it. Try M-x load-library undigestify (this is for gnu 18.XX) and then M-x undigestify the message (assuming that it is in the current buffer.) Bob -- mende@rutgers.edu {...}!rutgers!mende mende@zodiac.bitnet
kenw@noah.arc.CDN (Ken Wallewein) (06/06/87)
I don't get a lot of duplicate messages. Perhaps this is a "local phenomenon". Those who do seem to want digests, and vice versa. Could that be a clue to the source of the problem? As I've said before, I *don't* want digests. And I, for one, have accidentally sent the same message twice on occasion. How does anybody fix that? /kenw A L B E R T A Ken Wallewein R E S E A R C H C O U N C I L
SLOANE@UKANVAX.BITNET (Bob Sloane) (06/22/87)
I seem to be receiving duplicate messages again. The following is the
header from one of the duplicates. I received at least 4 of these, and
have received duplicates of other messages from the same sender. I hope
this information will help track down the source of the duplicate messages.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: BITNET%"ACSCCRA@UBVMS"
To: SLOANE
Subj: Re: SET TERM/MESS_UP_SETTINGS
Received: From MARIST(MAILER) by UKANVAX with RSCS id 9780
for SLOANE@UKANVAX; Sat, 20 Jun 87 19:49 CST
Received: by MARIST (Mailer X1.24) id 9693; Sat, 20 Jun 87 17:36:00 EDT
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 87 12:12 EDT
Reply-To: INFO-VAX@SRI-KL.ARPA
Sender: INFO-VAX Discussion <INFO-VAX@MARIST>
Comments: Warning -- RSCS tag indicates an origin of SMTP@WISCVM
From: "Curtis R. Anderson" <ACSCCRA@UBVMS>
Subject: Re: SET TERM/MESS_UP_SETTINGS
To: "John A. Thywissen" <JOHN@UKANVAX>,
Kevin Rice <KRICE@UKANVAX>,
"Richard Kershenbaum" <RICHARD@UKANVAX>,
"Bob Sloane" <SLOANE@UKANVAX>SIT.BUSH@CU20B.COLUMBIA.EDU (Nick Bush) (06/23/87)
From the headers of the duplicate messages I've been getting, they seem to be being duplicated at the source. The majority of them this week have been from UBVMS. It looks like there is a problem with the mailer being used there that is causing it to resend messages some number of times. - Nick Bush SIT.BUSH@CU20B.COLUMBIA.EDU -------
kenw@noah.arc.CDN (Ken Wallewein) (06/26/87)
I have some further information which may be of help. Please note that I am a
relative novice to this/these network(s) (what DO you you call the whole thing,
anyway? :-), and am *not* any kind of an expert on these matters.
It appears that most, if not all, of the complaints are coming from BITNET.
I'm not criticizing BITNET - nice people live there.
Also, I received a message a short while ago in which the receiver of
duplicates of one of my message had noticed that they had apparently arrived
via two different routes:
kenw@noah.arc.cdn and noah.arc.cdn!ken
I live on CDNnet (ean/x.400), which uses the former scheme. Our mail is
gatewayed through UBC to the other networks. As a guess, I would say that it
looks like UBC feeds our mail to both BITNET and usenet, and that BITnet is
also getting a separate feed from usenet. I leave it so those in charge to
check this out and take appropriate action.
Soon, I hope. I don't get duplicate messages, but I'm reading a lot of flak.
/kenw
A L B E R T A
Ken Wallewein R E S E A R C H
C O U N C I L