Hi, Bob.

BL> BL> It ought to *add* the "From:" line without removing
the other.
BL> BL> It has to do that in Netmail because it doesn't send your
BL> BL> address with an "* Origin..." line and the poor bugger on the
BL> BL> other end wouldn't know where it came from, otherwise.

BL> FM> Eh? What doesn't send an origin line?

BL>  PKT netmail. Have a look on your next one. The sender's address is
BL>added in the "From:" line at the top of the message. The
"* Origin..."
BL>is removed. I suppose someone had a reason for that, but I can't
BL>imagine what it was. Mad.

Mad. I wonder why the fuck it's done like that. Paul?

BL> FM> I think he probably changed it in 221, as I think I've only
BL> FM> done 1 upgrade. I must say I agree with Rod here about proper
BL> FM> testing, including regression testing to see that you didn't
BL> FM> break something else. Even for something as simple as this
BL> FM> PKTQWK stuff. There ain't no such thing as a minor software
BL> FM> change! :-)

BL>  Anyway, 222 sends faulty netmail back to yourself, and I think
BL>that's the best thing to do, even if you'll never know what you did
BL>wrong without the "To:" address in the message.

It's better, short of having it do it properly and insist on an address,
or look it up.

BL>  I didn't realise what a ramshackle system fido e-mail is, until I
BL>wrote the conversions. It says a lot for the reliability of computers
BL>and modems that it works at all. There is no safety net under
BL>anything.

Oh well, it works mostly.

Regards, FIM.

 * * Real Users know your home telephone number.
@EOT:

---