Carlos, On Friday 13 October 2006 13:14, Carlos E. R. wrote:

The Friday 2006-10-13 at 12:52 +0200, Clayton wrote:

...

On top of the over-zealous SPAM filter...

I have been told that SuSE IT personnel have been informed of that, but they are taking a hellish time to mend it. It is their bayessian filter that is very badly trained, as usual.

...

I see all the mails now from the list as individual mails - threading is broken. Anyone else getting this?

No. Pine is working fine.

You're seeing no message threads that have become fractured? They are numerous in my SuSE-Linux-E mailbox. I use KMail and even have the "Thread Messages also by Subject" option enabled.

Perhaps gmail client is getting confused with the spam word in the subject line. Threading is to be done using the internal headers, but some mailers use the subject line instead.

No. There's a real problem. My first thought was that it was people using Outlook / Outlook Express, but the first message I looked at (upon reading Clayton's message) whose threading was broken was sent using KMail.

Carlos E. R.

Randall Schulz

Patrick, On Friday 13 October 2006 13:53, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

* Randall R Schulz [10-13-06 16:41]:

...

No. There's a real problem. My first thought was that it was people using Outlook / Outlook Express, but the first message I looked at (upon reading Clayton's message) whose threading was broken was sent using KMail.

Hummm, no problems observed in threading in mutt. It is reasonable to assume that Carlos' thoughts of poor spam filter training is correct, especially since there was a similar recent case in the suse lists.

How does that explain the problem? What I failed to notice before was that messages that are parts of threads but that do not get properly inserted into their thread (in KMail, anyway) actually _do_ have In-Reply-To header fields. So I'm guessing there are missing messages that interrupt the chain of In-Reply-To headers.

-- Patrick Shanahan

Randall Schulz

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Friday 2006-10-13 at 13:39 -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:

...

No. Pine is working fine.

You're seeing no message threads that have become fractured? They are numerous in my SuSE-Linux-E mailbox. I use KMail and even have the "Thread Messages also by Subject" option enabled.

I don't see more threads broken that the usual person using a broken mailer that breaks threading. For this one, I see this: A 12:52pm Clayton (3683) . [SLE] SPAM: Threading on mailing list broken? 1:10pm Sylvester Lykkehus (3617) |-SPAM: Re: [SLE] SPAM: Threading on mailing list 6:15am Steve Jeppesen (3341) |-SPAM: Re: [SLE] SPAM: Threading on mailing list 11:35am JB (3853) |-SPAM: Re: [SLE] SPAM: Threading on mailing list 10:14pm To: SLE (3945) . |-Re: [SLE] Threading on mailing list broken? 1:39pm Randall R Schulz (4243) . |-> 4:53pm Patrick Shanahan (3931) . |-> 2:20pm Randall R Schulz (4067) | |-SPAM: Re: [SLE] Threading on mailing list 1:19pm John Andersen (3784) |-SPAM: Re: [SLE] Threading on mailing list br Tell me of some of the subjects for which you see broken threads, and I'll check. But I think kmail is broken in this respect, or that you must not use "Thread Messages also by Subject" - the word "spam" breaks the subject threading. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFFMAhRtTMYHG2NR9URAidhAKCRi+SvHoW2PRuiuHsyom2NzYpyegCcC/ox E/G3YXYe/0jm1xU2kmSb8Fc= =Fbg6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Friday 2006-10-13 at 15:01 -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:

On Friday 13 October 2006 14:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

...

Tell me of some of the subjects for which you see broken threads, and I'll check. But I think kmail is broken in this respect, or that you must not use "Thread Messages also by Subject" - the word "spam" breaks the subject threading.

Doug McGarrett posted "HP Laser 12020 (more)" (or will, in about 3 years and 7 months...) with this message ID header:

Message-id: <201005081458.22543.dmcgarrett@optonline.net>

That one was diffcult to find... | Date: Sat, 08 May 2010 14:58:22 -0400 | From: Doug McGarrett | Subject: [SLE] HP Laser 1020 (more) It is "HP Laser 1020...", a "2" less. And it was sent on Feb 2006. I can not judge the threading problem based on that thread, because it is not recent; ie, I can not see if the broken spam checking on SuSE servers of the last week has affected it. But it was broken in three threads, and hijacked twice. 4151 Feb 2006 Alfredo Cole (2960) . [SLE] HP Laser 1020 4152 Feb 2006 Peter Collier (3576) |-> 4153 Feb 2006 Jerry Feldman (3813) |-> 4154 Feb 2006 nicola .:kOoLiNuS:. losito (3558) |-> 4155 Feb 2006 babu Avedissian (4004) |-> 4156 Feb 2006 Johannes Meixner (4119) . |-> 4157 Feb 2006 Alfredo Cole (3509) | |-> 4158 Feb 2006 Digvijoy Chatterjee (4425) . | |-[SLE] Unable to access SMB share printer 4159 Feb 2006 Johannes Meixner (3767) | |-> 4160 Feb 2006 Doug McGarrett (5039) . |-> 4161 Feb 2006 Hans du Plooy (3512) |-> 4162 Feb 2006 S Glasoe (4295) |-> 4163 Feb 2006 Doug McGarrett (5649) . |-> 4164 Feb 2006 S Glasoe (4651) | |-> 4165 Feb 2006 Doug McGarrett (3659) . |-Re: [SLE] HP Laser 1020 (more) 4166 Feb 2006 Ken Schneider (3742) . | |-> 4167 May 2010! Doug McGarrett (3625) . | |-> 4168 Feb 2006 Ken Schneider (3909) | |-> 4169 Feb 2006 Jerry Feldman (3721) | |-> 4170 Feb 2006 Johannes Meixner (4089) |-> 4408 Feb 2006 Ken Schneider (4146) . Re: [SLE] HP Laser 1020 (more) 4409 Feb 2006 Alfredo Cole (3859) . |-> 4410 Feb 2006 Patrick Shanahan (4051) . |-> 4411 Feb 2006 Hans du Plooy (3767) . | |-> 4412 Feb 2006 Johannes Meixner (5331) | | |-> 4413 Feb 2006 Bryan S. Tyson (3630) . | |-> 4414 Feb 2006 suse_gasjr4wd@mac.com (3754) | | |-> 4415 Mar 2006 Doug McGarrett (4397) . | |-> 4416 Mar 2006 Patrick Shanahan (4221) | |-> 4417 Mar 2006 Doug McGarrett (5378) | |-> 4418 Mar 2006 Jerry Feldman (4534) | |-> 4419 Feb 2006 Johannes Meixner (3696) . |-> 4420 Feb 2006 Alfredo Cole (4507) |-> 4421 May 2010! Doug McGarrett (3042) . [SLE] HP Laser 1020 (more) 4422 Feb 2006 Chadley Wilson (4315) |-SPAM: RE: [SLE] HP Laser 1020 (more) 4423 Feb 2006 Ken Schneider (3393) |-> 4424 Feb 2006 andrew kar (3231) . |-[SLE] unsuscribe 4425 Feb 2006 Curtis Rey (4782) . |-> 4426 Feb 2006 Ben Rosenberg (5322) . |-> 4427 Feb 2006 Patrick Shanahan (3319) . | |-> 4428 Feb 2006 jfweber@bellsouth.net (3800) | |-> 4429 Feb 2006 dparker@utica.edu (3144) |-> - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFFMBfmtTMYHG2NR9URAkDLAJ4yVuxgsYmyD/8BNCEjj7eqfI+1JQCdG3Kb lV3eflYUxEyk/PBjyXmQVKc= =v1/P -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Friday 2006-10-13 at 16:06 -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:

OK. I think I know what happened on my end, in this particular case, anyway:

Based on the volume of any given list to which I subscribe, I move the contents to archive mailboxes periodically. For a list with the volume of SuSE-Linux-E, I make monthly archives. When I do this, I turn of threading and just take the previous month's messages and move them to the new archive folder.

I do it the other way: I sort by thread, then I move them, tagging them one by one or by thread, using Pine (^T marks the whole thread). It is much faster for these things than any GUI based MUA.

When a message is vastly post-dated, as these two from Doug McGarrett were, they perpetually end up at the bottom of the date-sorted mailbox, and hence never get moved to an archive folder. On the other hand, posts from the other participants on the thread (probably) don't have their system's clocks seriously off, do get moved to the archive mailbox, and the thread is fractured.

X'-) I understand. Pine shows the date of that one as "May 2010!". And SpamAssassin tags it as "DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX". - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFFMCAStTMYHG2NR9URAkBmAJwKhEISYnJNAnmOB+A8AqROM4XNHgCfdk6M 2bMDzkuXlUodmEZofOyDGxo= =pSa/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

John, On Friday 13 October 2006 17:26, John wrote:

...

Why don't you create message filters to do that automatically? FYI, KMail is painfully SLOWWWWW... Thunderbird is way faster. I don't know what you call lots of messages, but this email account has 7000+ messages markes as unread right now, and over 7200 actual emails in the Inbox... and they all are threading properly (by Subject) in Thunderbird.

Slow? KMail is performs just fine for me, and I get several hundred messages a day. I have 62 filters configured and active and monitor three SMTP accounts plus locally delivered mail. Thunderbird, on the other hand, is quite shabby in its features and human interface and is scarcely tolerable to me (I use it at work for lack of an suitable alternative under RedHat Enterprise Linux 3). By the way, threading is not something properly done by textual content of the Subject: header. It's to be done primarily based on the presense of In-Reply-To: headers. Besides, periodic archiving is not really something I want to automate, nor would it fix the problem with messages with incorrect dates. Randall Schulz

On Friday 13 October 2006 23:26, Peter Nikolic wrote:

Cheers folks    count down running  Mepis on the horizon and closing fast ..

So Pete, What's the big attraction to mepis? As opposed to Ubuntu or RedHat something more mainstream? I'm curious, I've used a lot of distros but never Mepis. -- _____________________________________ John Andersen

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Friday 2006-10-13 at 23:49 +0200, Theo v. Werkhoven wrote:

For your .procmailrc:

:0fw: * ^X-Mailinglist:.*suse-linux-e | sed -e 's/SPAM: //'

Huh? -e script, --expression=script add the script to the commands to be executed - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFFMA0NtTMYHG2NR9URAqOLAJ9RMu/JEFaw5YizT9OtjNP50VJhJACglOaq K1asFTAtjNYfCm/hKdyh7gc= =no36 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Saturday 2006-10-14 at 00:10 +0200, Theo v. Werkhoven wrote:

It does work, but the -e option isn't really needed.

This is better I think:

:0fwH: * ^X-Mailinglist:.*suse-linux-e { :0 fwh | sed 's/SPAM: //' }

I don't like using sed for that... perhaps formail. I don't think sed can guarantee to touch only the Subject header and nothing at all from the rest. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD4DBQFFMBpJtTMYHG2NR9URAuwkAJ9bJbPGXKdpsJ08AH5PtD2kFywajwCY7Eha kyWUzSVWtr/m1bpMsx84bg== =04L6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Saturday 2006-10-14 at 01:24 +0200, Theo v. Werkhoven wrote:

...

I don't like using sed for that... perhaps formail. I don't think sed can guarantee to touch only the Subject header and nothing at all from the rest.

Show us how to replace parts of the Subject-line with formail please. I know how to replace/delete/add *complete* headerlines, but not how to use a regexp search and replace like sed what does.

I have no idea.

The procmail flag h takes care that only the headers are fed through the filter btw.

Ah! I hadn't noticed that.

I keep an eye on the procmail log after making a new recipy of course, so far it does what I had in mind.

Me too. I discovered that you can enclose the modified section like this: VERBOSE=on procmail recipe VERBOSE=off It is better than using "verbose" for the whole procmail file.

One more small change in the recipy: the flags in the parent are extraneous and I included opensuse in the searchfield

There are several lists affected. Dunno... I'll wait a while - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFFMCPOtTMYHG2NR9URAunMAKCLx0/5bnflU8xH22fWDuIiYX0TrQCdGjVf /N9Jwhas720OE+NmaIvCIMA= =22hF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----