Re: Spurious diagnostic messages

From	Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: Spurious diagnostic messages
Date	2015-09-06 10:59 -0700
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<kfntwr7tomc.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> (permalink)
References	(16 earlier) <mjus0p$4eb$1@dont-email.me> <kfnfv4w53r5.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <molbhc$jss$1@dont-email.me> <kfnfv4bfw05.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <mpkvb8$4aj$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:

> (I've been on holiday for a week or so - my apologies if anything I
> write here covers points already raised by others, which I haven't yet
> read.)
>
> On 26/07/15 05:17, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
>>
>>> On 10/07/15 19:19, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 24/05/15 16:44, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I see no reason to make any of these changes.  A binary base
>>>>>> isn't useful because the lengths involved make it hard to
>>>>>> see just what the value is (and is error prone to write).
>>>>>
>>>>> Binary constants of the format 0b0110 made it into C compilers and the
>>>>> C++ standards because they are very useful,
>>>>
>>>> C++ has made lots of decisions which are IMO bad ones.  So I guess
>>>> I'm not surprised to see another one.
>>>
>>> That sounds as though you are saying that because binary constants
>>> were added to C++, they must be a bad idea (in your humble opinion,
>>> of course).
>>
>> I don't know why you would think that.  It isn't what I said.
>> Certainly it is not what I meant.
>
> I can agree that you did not /write/ exactly that - but you
> /imply/ that you see C++'s introduction of 0b literals as a good
> reason to be sceptical to including them in C, simply because (in
> your eyes) C++ has record for introducing bad ideas.

You are misunderstanding my comments.  I implied no such thing.

> (Arguably the fact that C++ supports them makes them less
> necessary in C - people who really need binary constants can drop
> C and go to C++ instead.)
>
>>> We have 0b00110 constants in C++ and as en extension on many C
>>> compilers precisely because it was useful to /users/.  The history
>>> of implementation is easy to follow:
>>>
>>> avr-gcc developers added it because the users and the AVR gcc
>>> library developers wanted it.  (The AVR is an 8-bit microcontroller,
>>> with a gcc port.).  It got wider adoption into mainline gcc, and was
>>> copied by clang.  The C++ standards committee were asked to include
>>> it for the benefit of embedded developers - they saw that it was
>>> already implemented in mainstream tools, it is useful and is used in
>>> practice, and causes no harm to include it.  So they added it to
>>> their standards.
>>>
>>> A number of other embedded compilers also support it - either before
>>> or after its support in gcc.
>>
>> I understand that people wanted it, and some compilers put it in
>> because it's easy if all you have to think about is taking the
>> constants in program source.  That isn't the same thing as saying
>> it's useful, or that the benefits are worth the cost.
>
> First, people wanted them because they /are/ useful to embedded
> developers.

I don't accept this assertion without some sort of objective
supporting evidence.

> The people who asked for them were people who write
> code for embedded systems, and who had to use hex or decimal
> literals where binary literals would be neater and clearer.  There
> were also people who had found similar features useful on other
> compilers, or used headers full of macros like "#define B00000001
> 0x01".
>
> No one is claiming that binary literals are essential, nor that
> they are used a lot - but sometimes they can be very useful in
> writing clearer and neater code.
>
> So please let us put this one to rest - they /are/ a useful
> feature, people want them, and people use them (since they are
> already implemented in many embedded compilers).
>
> And there can be no doubt that it would be better for the people
> that use binary literals, and the compilers that support them, for
> them to be made part of newer C standards as they are in newer C++
> standards.

The question is how useful, and at what cost, and what are
the comparisons with alternatives.

> Given how small a change this is to the language, it would not be
> difficult to add support for 0b binary literals to existing C
> compilers (Bart said it took merely a few minutes for him - even
> with documentation, test cases, etc., it is not a big change).
> Most serious C compilers these days are part of a compiler suite
> supporting C++ as well - sooner or later they will have binary
> literal support anyway.

And I have explained in several places that there are other
costs that are more significant.

> Ian gave a link showing the C++ proposal for adding 0b binary
> literals, which shows the minor changes needed to the C++
> standards to support them.  There is no reason to expect that
> changes to the C standards would be any more dramatic.

I read it.  First it wasn't an argument that they should be
added, just a description of what the changes should be.  Second
the attitude of the C++ community towards new language features
is markedly different from that of the C community.  Third
because of other features in C++ the respective considerations in
the two languages are quite a bit different.  So that document
doesn't make the case for making a change to C.

> No one is asking for support for binary literals in printf, scanf,
> or any other library functions (conversion to binary for output is
> simply enough to do "manually" when needed).

That's wrong - some people have asked for such support, if binary
constants were added to the language;  based on that I think not
adding such support would be a bad choice for the C community
generally.

> There would be no conflict with any existing code.
>
> Thus I think it is pretty clear that the costs are minimal.  It is
> hard to imagine a change to the language with lower costs.

You keep saying that.  And I keep saying in response let's see
some objective and quantitative evidence.

> So even if the change only benefits a fraction of C programmers,
> it is useful to them, cost-free to other users, and minimal cost
> to compiler writers and the C standards committee.  That sounds to
> me like benefits that are worth the cost.

Opinions are worth nothing here.  Do you have nothing better?

> (And remember that the C++ committee agree on that score, and I
> presume they did a better cost/benefit analysis than either you or
> I.)

First, they agree for C++, which has different considerations.
Second, considering the track record for C++ language features,
I don't especially see any reason to assume they did a good job.
In particular the C++ community seems to assign zero weight to
the cost of language complexity, which I think most people would
agree is at odds with the attitude of the C community.

>>> Of course, since /you/ think it is a bad idea, everyone else is
>>> clearly wrong.
>>
>> There's no reason to be sarcastic.  If we have a difference of
>> opinion, we can explore that difference in a civilized way.
>
> I have yet to hear anything concrete from you other than that you
> think binary literals are a bad idea.  You have offered no
> justification for claims that they are not useful, nor any
> justification for claims that they would be costly.  I am not
> asking for any references or statistics - a short reasoning would
> be enough to get started.

First, I have given some reasons for both of those.  Second, and
more important, let me say this again in all capitals - THE
BURDEN IS ON THOSE PROPOSING A LANGUAGE CHANGE TO JUSTIFY THE
CHANGE.  It's your job to convince other people, not the other
way around.

>>>>> particularly in embedded programming where we live in a world of
>>>>> bits for device registers, IO ports, and so on.  [snip
>>>>> elaboration]
>>>>
>>>> I don't find this motivation convincing.  ISTM that in such
>>>> cases one would want to define symbolic names for the various
>>>> masks, etc, and use those rather than putting binary constants
>>>> everywhere, in which cases the exact form of the constant
>>>> used is of much less importance.  (Surely you don't mean to
>>>> suggest that embedded programmers are guilty of bad programming
>>>> practices?)  Moreover I think it's likely that the documentation
>>>> that describes such fields gives their values in octal, decimal,
>>>> or hex rather than binary, excepting perhaps for masks which
>>>> are better described in terms of width and position than using
>>>> a long binary constant.
>>>
>>> I think that like many programmers (including me), you believe
>>> your own niche to be the most important, and extrapolate from it
>>> to other areas of programming.  You are not an embedded systems
>>> developer, and in particular you don't work with small
>>> microcontrollers.  You don't read datasheets, you don't work with
>>> these small systems, you don't write libraries or headers for
>>> them, and you don't live in a world of bits and bytes.  So please
>>> don't try to make sweeping statements about when binary constants
>>> may or may not be useful to embedded programmers.
>>
>> An ad hominem argument.  It's insulting and presumptuous of you
>> to tell me what my background and experience is.  Furthermore
>> it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand, unless you are more
>> interested in scoring debate points than in understanding the
>> truth of the matter.
>
> I have been programming small embedded systems for over 20 years,
> in C, assembly, and a little C++.  I have read (as in close to
> "cover to cover") many hundreds of datasheets.  I have worked
> seriously with perhaps a dozen different microcontroller and cpu
> architectures.  It is certainly possible that you have worked with
> embedded systems - as you say, I don't know your background and
> experiences, and "embedded" is a very wide field.  (For example,
> Ian also works with embedded systems -
> yet I think there is quite a difference in the sorts of systems we
> usually work with, and the types of development we usually do.)
>
> But I am fed up with /you/ telling /me/ about small systems
> embedded development, and how small systems developers want to
> write their code, and how our datasheets and documents are
> written.

You have misunderstood my comments.  I haven't said anything
about any of these.  (I did make a comment about documents
generally, but not about documents relating to embedded
development in particular.)

> /I/ am telling /you/ that datasheets use binary
> regularly, and they almost never use octal.

Okay, for the sake of discussion I will accept that as given.

> I am telling you that
> embedded programmers like to be able to write binary literals on
> occasion, and many find them useful in writing clearer code.
>
> If another experienced embedded programmer (such as Ian)
> contradicts this, it is worth listening to him.  But with all due
> respect for your knowledge and experience of programming, you
> cannot speak for small systems embedded developers.

I'm not speaking for them, nor am I trying to.  And actually what
they want or what they think is not especially interesting,
because it doesn't prove anything one way or the other.  What are
the actual productivity gains, and how do those compare to
alternatives?  What people imagine and what is objectively true
often are quite different - that's why I'm looking for the
latter, not the former.

>>> The reality is that datasheets will use binary, decimal or
>>> hexadecimal as appropriate - with register fields being usually
>>> either binary or hexadecimal.  (Octal is almost never used.  I can
>>> only remember seeing it in the context of an ASCII character set
>>> on a small display, and that was a decade or two ago.)
>>
>> If you have facts and evidence to present, by all means present
>> them.  Sweeping generalizations are meaningless.
>
> You want me to provide links for datasheets that use binary?
>
> Here's a couple of random microcontroller reference manuals.
>
> <http://www.atmel.com/Images/doc8077.pdf>
> <http://cache.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/ref_manual/KL03P24M48SF0RM.pdf>

As above I am willing to stipulate this for the sake of
furthering the discussion.

> Or do you want me to prove that octal is almost never used?

Given the above stipulation I think it's fair to say that
this question is moot.

>>> And the reality is that programmers will sometimes want to use
>>> hexadecimal constants in their code, and sometimes decimal, and
>>> sometimes binary, and sometimes using a shift notation such as (1u
>>> << 4).  And sometimes they will want to give the constants a name
>>> or enum value in a header file or at the start of the C file, and
>>> sometimes they will want to use the constant directly in the code.
>>> Sometimes that might be "bad" programming practice - but sometimes
>>> it might be good practice.
>>
>> Even assuming all that is true, and I'm not sure it is, that
>> doesn't excuse not looking at the costs or comparing the costs
>> against the marginal utility gained.  Have you, or has anyone
>> for that matter, even made an effort to estimate the marginal
>> utility in programmer time or program development cost?  If the
>> argument is that it's valuable then we should try to find out
>> what the value is, in objective terms.
>
> Please tell us your experience in this area, and how often you
> have worked with low-level and bare-metal programming on small
> microcontrollers.  That will help us judge the value of your gut
> feelings about how useful binary literals may or may not be to
> programmers in this area.

I have no interest in judging gut feelings.  My opinion, or your
opinion, or anyone's opinion, is not what is needed here.

> As for the supposed costs for implementing 0b binary literals, I
> can only point out /again/ that they are already implemented on
> many major compilers, either as an extension in C or as a
> standards requirement in C++, and that the costs for
> standardisation in C++ were minimal.

Same comments as given above.

> I am fully in agreement with you that any change requires a
> consideration and balance between the usefulness of the change and
> its costs.  The disagreement is that you /imagine/ binary literals
> to be of little real use, while I /know/ they are used in the real
> world of embedded programming, and that you /imagine/ them to have
> high costs, while I /know/ they are already implemented at low
> cost.

First, if you don't have any objective supporting evidence, what
you "know" is of no value.  Second, what we are interested in is
not the cost of adding binary literals to one compiler but the
TCO for making a language change.  Somehow the people proposing
the change keep ignoring the distinction between those two,
even though it has been pointed out repeatedly.

> Trying to turn all this into an objective, quantifiable cost/benefit
> analysis with statistics of man-hours saved or cost is a worthy goal
> in theory - but in practice it is a waste of time in this case.  It
> would take far longer merely to specify such a study properly than it
> would to simply add the required few lines to the next C standards
> draft.  Remember, the equivalent C++ proposal document was 3 pages -
> the C proposal would be similar.

You think it's a waste of time.  I say if someone won't even make
even some effort to provide some sort of objective evidence their
proposal should be rejected out of hand.  So if what we're
talking about is just opinion, you are welcome to yours but it
hasn't changed mine.

>> Related to that, it is my pleasure to pass along a link from a
>> posting by Glen Herrmannsfeldt, to a talk about these kinds of
>> questions.  You might find it interesting;  I certainly did.
>>
>> https://www.cs.washington.edu/events/colloquia/search/details?id=2594
>
> I haven't watched it yet, but I will do so.
>
>>> So please just accept the reality that 0b binary constants are a
>>> useful feature, and would be a worthwhile addition to the C
>>> standards that would be welcomed by many embedded programmers, and
>>> happily ignored by most non-embedded programmers.
>>
>> If it's so important to you for binary constants to be added to
>> C, why don't you put in the effort of doing a serious
>> costs/benefits investigation, considering all the ramifications,
>> rather than just huffing and puffing?  When considering new
>> language features to be added to C, the burden of proof is
>> generally understood to be on those proposing the change.  And
>> that is as it should be.
>
> It is not important for embedded programmers that these are added
> to the C standards - embedded programmers already have 0b binary
> literals in their compilers.  It is important for the C standards
> committee - they have to follow what happens in the real world, or
> face increasing irrelevance.

Well if it isn't important, just drop it.  I'm okay with
some people deciding C is no longer relevant.  That will
make it easier for those of us who still think it is.

> If we were to ask about 0b binary literals in comp.arch.embedded,
> where there are a great deal more practical-minded embedded
> developers, we would see several answers.  There would be those
> people that use them, because they are useful and they work with
> their toolchains.  There would be people who would want to use
> them, but unfortunately their toolchains don't support them.
> There would be people who had never thought about them, but now
> will start to use them.  There would be people who would like to
> use them, but their coding standard mandates strict ANSI C (or
> whatever).  And there will be people who think they are a nice
> idea even though they don't use them personally.
>
> I think it would be very unlikely to find people who thought they
> were a bad idea, or who would only use them if they get added to
> the C standards.

Once again, AFAIAC personal opinions carry no weight in this
matter.  It seems like that bothers you.  Does it?  If so,
why does it?

> It is the C standards committee that should be worried that people
> are using the "gnu11" standard rather than C11 standard.

Perhaps so, but I doubt very much that binary constants are
the most important consideration there.  Furthermore, since
C explicitly allows extensions, there doesn't seem to be
anything wrong with some poeple use gnu11 as far as WG14
is concerned.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 08:09 +0100
  Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-04-23 10:56 +0200
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-23 21:13 +1200
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-04-23 11:25 +0200
        Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 10:36 +0100
          Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-04-23 11:54 +0200
            Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 11:06 +0100
              Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-04-23 12:35 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 11:44 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-04-23 12:56 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 12:16 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-04-23 12:09 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-24 07:52 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-23 16:15 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-24 08:21 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-23 16:44 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-24 13:01 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 04:16 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 12:19 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robbie Hatley <see.my.sig@for.my.address> - 2015-04-24 04:42 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-24 16:07 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robbie Hatley <see.my.sig@for.my.address> - 2015-04-25 22:08 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-26 14:29 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-04-26 15:45 +0000
          Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.lists@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-23 11:43 +0100
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-04-23 09:29 +0000
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-04-23 11:52 -0700
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-25 03:03 -0700
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 10:53 +0100
  Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.lists@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-23 11:37 +0100
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 12:12 +0100
  Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-04-23 12:46 +0200
  Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-23 08:47 -0400
  Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Fred K <fred.l.kleinschmidt@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 07:39 -0700
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 16:20 +0100
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-23 12:43 -0400
  Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-24 01:40 -0700
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-24 11:14 +0100
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-24 10:02 -0700
        Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-24 18:20 +0100
          Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-24 13:27 -0700
        Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-04-25 10:25 +0000
        Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-24 23:02 +0100
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.lists@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-24 11:30 +0100
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-26 08:09 -0700
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-04-26 12:26 -0700
        Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-28 09:52 -0700
          Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-04-28 11:27 -0700
            Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-28 20:09 +0100
            Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-30 07:11 -0700
            Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-05-09 13:14 +0300
              Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-10 08:23 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-10 11:06 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-11 21:52 -0700
            Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-10 12:20 -0400
              Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-05-10 13:22 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-10 18:44 +0100
              Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-10 11:12 -0700
              Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-11 21:46 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-12 10:11 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-12 18:26 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-12 11:29 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-13 09:14 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-13 11:55 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-13 14:55 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-13 14:35 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-13 08:24 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-13 18:47 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-13 21:15 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-13 19:40 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-13 21:08 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-13 20:52 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-13 21:06 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-13 23:28 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-14 00:19 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-14 04:29 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-14 09:57 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-14 04:56 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-14 11:34 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-14 17:24 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-16 01:21 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-17 10:00 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2015-06-21 12:46 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-21 13:20 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-14 17:22 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-16 01:59 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-16 09:51 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-16 05:36 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-16 19:32 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-14 17:13 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-17 10:13 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-13 18:54 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-14 01:31 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-13 21:05 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-14 00:48 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-14 17:27 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-16 02:00 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-14 09:41 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-14 05:02 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-14 13:44 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-14 17:32 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-14 20:18 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2015-05-15 05:32 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-15 13:47 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2015-05-16 02:51 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-16 17:13 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2015-05-17 22:34 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-20 08:47 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-17 10:36 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-17 12:26 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-17 14:13 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-17 13:45 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-17 15:02 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-17 14:20 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-17 15:51 +0100
                I'm starting a new thread (Was: Spurious diagnostic messages) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-17 15:00 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-17 07:58 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-17 15:36 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-17 22:28 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-20 08:59 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-05-20 11:58 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages bart4858@gmail.com - 2015-05-20 14:00 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-05-20 18:10 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages bart4858@gmail.com - 2015-05-21 00:57 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-05-21 12:40 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages bart4858@gmail.com - 2015-05-21 13:25 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-21 14:33 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-22 09:11 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-22 08:15 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-22 11:47 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-22 12:11 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-05-23 07:26 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-22 14:14 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-05-23 09:28 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-05-22 21:36 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-05-25 11:36 +0300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-22 14:16 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-22 08:38 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-22 18:06 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-22 13:56 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-22 23:38 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-22 18:28 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-22 16:44 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-24 07:44 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-24 16:52 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-24 22:19 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-24 22:28 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-25 00:00 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 10:12 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-24 23:13 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-25 11:30 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2015-05-25 07:41 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-25 17:10 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-25 17:42 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-25 12:20 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 10:07 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-10 20:09 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 11:19 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-11 20:25 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-16 08:48 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-16 14:21 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 08:52 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 21:21 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-23 02:49 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-23 21:35 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-27 07:30 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-24 15:35 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-27 08:13 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-27 18:14 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-01 09:06 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages "Bartc" <bartc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-01 18:26 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-09 08:45 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-23 11:48 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-27 08:50 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-19 04:54 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-17 11:49 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 09:06 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-20 18:18 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-20 11:52 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 20:09 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-20 13:18 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-20 16:24 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 07:59 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-07-21 21:07 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 07:52 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-20 23:17 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-20 15:51 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-24 13:50 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-24 22:45 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-25 18:59 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-25 20:49 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-31 13:22 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-27 08:48 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-25 12:04 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-26 09:11 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-26 11:26 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-05-26 22:02 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-26 14:59 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-26 16:58 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-26 16:19 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-27 08:45 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2015-06-21 12:46 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-21 20:41 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-21 13:27 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 10:19 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-11 08:47 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 13:40 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-21 13:49 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-25 20:17 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-26 16:54 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-31 01:25 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-31 17:46 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-02 06:00 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 16:31 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 13:13 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 08:36 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-26 08:38 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-27 16:22 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 11:49 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-04 14:25 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-05 17:19 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-09 10:29 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-09 18:45 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-09 13:32 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-09 22:13 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-09 15:31 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-12 09:48 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-12 18:04 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages jadill33@gmail.com - 2015-10-12 10:29 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-12 11:09 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-12 14:46 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-12 15:35 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-13 08:58 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-13 06:37 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-10-13 21:34 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-10 15:44 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-19 10:06 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-19 10:22 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-19 15:57 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-10 00:58 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-10 14:25 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-10 04:01 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-09 20:03 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-10 09:04 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-14 10:55 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-14 13:11 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-14 23:17 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-19 09:41 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-19 10:17 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-19 18:49 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-19 11:21 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-19 11:50 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-19 12:57 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-19 14:37 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-19 15:56 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-19 13:08 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-19 21:06 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-19 20:26 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-19 20:51 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-20 09:01 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-20 22:07 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-20 15:20 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-20 11:34 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-20 11:37 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-20 03:51 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-20 12:15 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-20 12:51 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-20 14:16 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-20 15:32 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-20 16:49 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-25 21:26 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-25 14:58 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-25 23:33 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-25 20:34 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-10 14:56 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-10 08:53 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-10 21:17 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-10 21:06 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-20 14:54 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-20 12:37 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-19 20:58 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-19 23:17 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-19 11:12 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-19 19:30 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-19 11:44 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-11 08:15 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-11 08:48 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-12 13:24 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-12 06:42 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-12 15:57 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-12 08:26 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-12 22:05 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-12 13:31 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-13 11:02 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-13 09:01 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-12 23:15 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-12 22:32 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-12 16:31 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-13 02:09 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-12 19:56 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-13 13:22 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-13 09:59 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-14 17:03 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-14 12:58 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-14 14:39 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-14 15:43 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-14 20:48 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-17 21:50 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-17 14:14 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-27 16:28 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-27 11:26 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-27 13:32 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-12-10 19:38 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-15 22:00 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-15 18:51 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-16 09:03 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-17 10:17 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-17 12:39 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-18 00:36 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-17 16:46 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-17 20:20 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-18 06:00 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-17 23:28 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-17 19:01 -0600
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-20 15:59 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-21 15:33 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-11-21 15:09 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-21 15:27 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-22 18:28 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-22 10:23 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-23 06:30 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-22 12:51 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-22 22:04 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-22 15:07 -0600
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-23 00:14 -0600
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-23 08:32 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-11-24 02:10 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-24 10:39 -0600
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-23 06:35 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-23 06:23 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-23 08:01 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-23 22:18 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-23 17:42 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-24 05:23 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-24 06:45 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-24 13:39 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-24 09:05 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-24 08:28 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-25 02:19 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-27 13:37 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-22 18:20 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-21 15:12 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-11-21 10:28 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-22 18:30 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-22 15:13 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-23 06:42 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-22 14:40 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-23 06:55 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-11-14 10:16 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-14 13:44 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-11-14 14:17 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-14 22:00 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-14 13:02 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-15 10:07 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-15 01:43 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-14 22:51 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-15 05:27 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-15 10:06 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-14 13:20 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-15 01:36 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-13 09:04 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-13 05:32 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-11-13 08:46 -0600
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-13 14:56 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-11-13 12:24 -0600
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-12 16:36 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-13 13:36 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-12 17:04 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-11-13 07:16 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-12 17:07 -0600
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-11 08:54 -0800
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-12 17:03 -0600
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-12 23:11 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-15 10:05 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 06:51 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-19 10:47 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-19 21:15 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-20 10:45 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-10 00:48 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-14 10:14 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-14 11:05 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-14 22:37 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-14 13:48 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-14 14:49 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-15 09:56 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-14 23:37 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-14 23:28 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-18 06:06 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-19 03:50 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-19 15:49 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-20 12:01 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-20 01:59 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-19 19:57 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-20 09:28 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-10-20 09:46 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-06 11:39 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-09 13:37 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-10 11:55 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-10 00:19 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-14 09:46 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-10 00:46 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-14 09:54 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-31 09:01 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-01 08:13 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 01:08 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-02 14:29 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-03 09:15 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-03 08:22 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-22 08:24 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-22 19:24 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 11:02 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-24 20:13 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-30 13:30 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-22 03:06 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 08:12 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-26 07:44 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-26 15:33 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 19:57 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-09-28 20:52 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-29 11:19 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-28 22:26 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-30 13:56 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 19:22 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-30 19:45 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 09:02 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-04 18:34 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-05 00:23 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-04 15:56 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-04 20:04 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-09 09:13 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-09 13:40 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-10 22:26 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-10 13:49 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-14 07:53 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-27 17:30 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 10:26 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-05 17:02 +1300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-09 10:06 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 16:56 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-03 08:36 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-03 17:32 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-03 18:41 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 11:04 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-26 11:08 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-26 15:35 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-27 00:17 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-27 00:53 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-27 08:19 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-01 10:10 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-01 13:43 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-08-02 00:04 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 01:16 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-08-02 12:21 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 19:42 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 09:58 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-24 22:22 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-29 08:55 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-09-29 10:22 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-04 23:42 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-05 09:41 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-09 13:22 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-29 22:28 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-05 00:14 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-05 10:30 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-05 10:06 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-06 09:23 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-06 11:18 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-06 14:29 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-06 15:33 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-07 12:35 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-07 10:57 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-07 07:09 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-08 09:28 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-08 01:45 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-08 09:42 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-08 09:42 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-07 09:40 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-08 09:44 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-08 08:25 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-08 20:36 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-08 13:28 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-08 22:21 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-08 14:33 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-09 10:24 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-09 08:35 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-11 15:18 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-11 14:53 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-10-12 09:17 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-12 00:37 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-10 00:31 -0700

(Thread has 728 articles, showing 500 — browse group in flat view)

csiph-web