From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.user/13820 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lowell Gilbert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.user Subject: Re: mail-default-headers and gnus Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:18:08 -0400 Message-ID: <44pr2kz4en.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> References: <627ba8ba-f413-4c37-877c-97e89d46b373@r27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> <87fx3igcsa.fsf@lifelogs.com> <32dc5fec-0b6f-4e60-9e7c-a7372d11e523@v20g2000yqv.googlegroups.com> <87ljd9ed3x.fsf@lifelogs.com> <2a1fc4bf-4e5a-4f57-b12c-11d7e415154e@z35g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> <87r5n0d440.fsf@lifelogs.com> <68963727-1771-43a0-aa2b-762e0474fe66@b30g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> <87bpe4bfe9.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1273018507 15282 80.91.229.12 (5 May 2010 00:15:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 00:15:07 +0000 (UTC) To: info-gnus-english@gnu.org Original-X-From: info-gnus-english-bounces+gegu-info-gnus-english=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 05 02:15:06 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: gegu-info-gnus-english@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O9SGM-0002db-0a for gegu-info-gnus-english@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 May 2010 02:15:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54216 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O9SG6-0000Yn-Qf for gegu-info-gnus-english@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 May 2010 20:14:38 -0400 Original-Path: usenet.stanford.edu!postnews.google.com!news2.google.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.speakeasy.net!news.speakeasy.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:18:09 -0500 Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.gnus User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (berkeley-unix) Cancel-Lock: sha1:wwE8Y9XEi3ePuI5F9cJMe+ynNjQ= Original-Lines: 27 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.92.78.145 Original-X-Trace: sv3-S53ZXNO4/0Ft5hzZU5uLbdHsymH75lXxRFtgUuIuVXKJ1KNWAUz5na3yn6Q0VVrJP1VpffcdfmYs2iF!wOruQk4g2yvGbrxvZbbrdTToZMSu717Z4A0ek8O3MXrGL7m/sds8kq/LM4XVLhyRHVTS1QVz84Ia!cwcMP9dGvw== X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Original-Xref: usenet.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.gnus:84207 X-BeenThere: info-gnus-english@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Announcements and discussions for GNUS, the GNU Emacs Usenet newsreader \(in English\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: info-gnus-english-bounces+gegu-info-gnus-english=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: info-gnus-english-bounces+gegu-info-gnus-english=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.user:13820 Archived-At: Ted Zlatanov writes: > On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 06:53:30 -0700 (PDT) Francis Moreau wrote: > > FM> On Mar 31, 3:15 pm, Ted Zlatanov wrote: >>> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 02:21:00 -0700 (PDT) Francis Moreau wrote: >>> > FM> I tried to remove "Bcc" header field instead of "Gcc" (as your example > FM> do) but it doesn't work I still receive 2 copies of the email. >>> > FM> Do you know why ? >>> >>> Try it out as I explained, with `C-x C-e'.  Do you see the Bcc removed >>> but the Gcc left in? > > FM> Yes Bcc is removed as expected and Gcc is still there. But after > FM> sending the message I still get 2 copies. > > Could something be inserting the Bcc header back? If not it could be > the hook I suggested is too early and the Bcc gets inserted again. You > may also want to look at the actual message in the code you added to the > message-send-mail-hook; use (debug (buffer-string)) after you make the > modification. Is it possible that the Bcc is being added outside of Emacs? I've fooled myself on that kind of thing once or twice. The SMTP trace showed it (or, rather, its absence) quite clearly.