Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!ria!miller From: miller@ria.ccs.uwo.ca (J G Miller) Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: Bogus .UUCP addresses under SCO (TRN TRN TRN !!!) Summary: what about MAILHEADER environment setting Message-ID: <1089@ria.ccs.uwo.ca> Date: 5 Oct 90 00:10:34 GMT References: <1990Oct1.011018.10124@mthvax.cs.miami.edu> <373@stephsf.stephsf.com> Reply-To: J G Miller Followup-To: comp.mail.misc Organization: University of Western Ontario, LONDON, ON Lines: 15 In article <373@stephsf.stephsf.com> wengland@stephsf.stephsf.com (Bill England) writes: > The Reply-To: line is now obsolete anyway! Look at the header > and see how redundant a Reply-To: line would be. The solution is > to NOT include a Reply_To: line in your mail header. ( Removing > this also requires that you have the rn source and recompile. ) Doesn't this version of rn allow one to specify one's Reply-To address through the use of the MAILHEADER environment setting? -- J G Miller telephone: (519) 679-2111 extension 6325 Room 024, Chemistry Building InterNet: University of Western Ontario NetNorth: LONDON, Ontario, N6A 5B7 mailpath: {uunet!watmath,utai}!ria!a4346