schwager@m.cs.uiuc.edu (11/29/89)
I'm curious: why does spost (we run Berkeley systems here) insist on prepending Date: and From: fields to my outgoing messages? I think this is extra-redundant information. I mean, after half a dozen Date's and From's and Received By's, who wants to see another one? I've gone so far as to edit the source and add a -nofrom switch. If the denizens of MH would like to know what I did to add this (a mere 4 or 5 lines to send.c and spost.c, combined), I'd be happy to show 'em. Am I the only one that's ever said, "Now why the heck do they throw that in, and not give you a switch to turn it off?" In favor of leaner mail messages, -Mike Schwager INTERNET:schwager@cs.uiuc.edu | UUCP:{uunet|convex|pur-ee}!uiucdcs!schwager | BITNET:schwager%cs.uiuc.edu@uiucvmd | University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci. |
schwager@m.cs.uiuc.edu (11/29/89)
I'm curious: why does spost (we run Berkeley systems here) insist on prepending Date: and From: fields to my outgoing messages? I think this is extra-redundant information. I mean, after half a dozen Date's and From's and Received By's, who wants to see another one? I've gone so far as to edit the source and add a -nofrom switch. If the denizens of MH would like to know what I did to add this (a mere 4 or 5 lines to send.c and spost.c, combined), I'd be happy to show 'em. Am I the only one that's ever said, "Now why the heck do they throw that in, and not give you a switch to turn it off?" In favor of leaner mail messages, -Mike Schwager HNTERNET:schwager@cs.uiuc.edu EF | UUCP:{uunet|convex|pur-ee}!uiucdcs!schwager | BITNET:schwager%cs.uiuc.edu@uiucvmd | University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci.
tr@madeleine.ctt.bellcore.com (tom reingold) (11/29/89)
On the subject of "Extra From's and Date's", schwager@m.cs.uiuc.edu
writes:
$
$ I'm curious: why does spost (we run Berkeley systems here) insist on
$ prepending Date: and From: fields to my outgoing messages? I think this is
$ extra-redundant information. I mean, after half a dozen Date's and From's
$ and Received By's, who wants to see another one? I've gone so far as to
$ edit the source and add a -nofrom switch. If the denizens of MH would like
$ to know what I did to add this (a mere 4 or 5 lines to send.c and spost.c,
$ combined), I'd be happy to show 'em.
$
$ Am I the only one that's ever said, "Now why the heck do they throw that
$ in, and not give you a switch to turn it off?"
$ In favor of leaner mail messages,
$ -Mike Schwager
I don't see why it's a problem. In my .mh_profile, I have
showproc: mhl
and mhl uses ~/Mail/mhl.format or <mhdir>/etc/mhl.format. My
private copy is:
overflowtext="***",overflowoffset=5,width=256,
leftadjust,compwidth=10
ignores=msgid,message-id,received,bboard-id,bb-posted,return-path,x-mailer
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Cc:
extras:nocomponent
:
body:nocomponent,overflowtext=,overflowoffset=0,noleftadjust
so I never see that garbage.
Tom Reingold |INTERNET: tr@bellcore.com
Bellcore |UUCP: bellcore!tr
444 Hoes La room 1H217 |PHONE: (201) 699-7058 [work],
Piscataway, NJ 08854-4182 | (201) 287-2345 [home]
schwager@m.cs.uiuc.edu (12/03/89)
Well, call me weird, but whenever I've gotten mail messages, I'm frequently annoyed by all the fields. Now that I'm a groovy MH user, I can see that I no longer need worry about it. However, I like to keep my outgoing messages lean and mean. Short, crisp, and to the point- no extra fluff. Someone sent me mail and said that you want the extra From:'s and Date:'s in there because mail administrators can then track down problems. But, the very first thing my machine does is slap a From: and Date: field on the message. So if the message gets anywhere at all, it's gonna have 'em. Otherwise, any problem would certainly be on my local machine... -Mike Schwager INTERNET:schwager@cs.uiuc.edu | "I find it hard to believe you UUCP:{uunet|convex|pur-ee}!uiucdcs!schwager | don't know the beauty you are BITNET:schwager%cs.uiuc.edu@uiucvmd | But if you don't, let me be your University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci. | eyes and enter your darkness So you won't be afraid" -Lou Reed, _Velvet Underground_