Re: Spurious diagnostic messages

From	David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: Spurious diagnostic messages
Date	2015-08-02 13:37 +0200
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<mpkvb8$4aj$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(15 earlier) <kfnvbfi6nnp.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <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>

Show all headers | View raw

(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.

(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.  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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.

(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.)

>
>> 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.

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

>
>> 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>

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

>
>> 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.

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.

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.

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.

>
> 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.

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.

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

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 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 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 Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 08:12 +1200
                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 Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-08-01 20:20 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-02 18:57 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-02 08:21 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-01 14:31 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tonton Th <tTh@nowhere.invalid> - 2015-08-01 22:26 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 01:10 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-02 09:02 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-02 14:23 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-02 15:31 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-02 09:01 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-02 16:56 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-03 10:18 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-03 12:10 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 10:52 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-24 20:01 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 08:16 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-03 14:11 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-04 10:56 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-01 16:52 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-02 12:59 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-09 13:39 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 13:37 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-02 13:17 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 19:45 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-02 15:52 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-03 09:34 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-04 11:04 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-04 09:07 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-09 13:28 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 14:00 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-05 11:31 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-06 10:47 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-06 13:27 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-02 15:53 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-02 15:45 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-03 09:40 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 11:41 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-04 11:23 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-04 09:12 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-09 13:33 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-06 10:59 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-06 22:21 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-07 13:44 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-20 10:44 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages bart4858@gmail.com - 2015-05-20 13:42 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-20 14:17 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-20 21:25 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-23 10:17 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-23 10:15 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-23 11:46 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-23 17:22 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-05-25 11:49 +0300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-25 10:50 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-23 15:57 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-23 22:51 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-23 19:01 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-23 22:50 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-23 23:41 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-24 00:40 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-05-24 02:57 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-24 07:40 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-24 14:24 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-24 09:23 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-24 15:36 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-24 13:10 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-24 07:44 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-24 19:26 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-25 00:51 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-25 15:48 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-26 02:36 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-26 13:23 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-27 00:55 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-29 12:28 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-29 13:44 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-29 15:55 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-29 18:17 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-29 10:52 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-26 13:27 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-26 21:09 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-27 00:03 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-27 00:59 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-27 01:15 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-27 13:34 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-27 14:07 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-27 19:53 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-27 21:21 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-05-27 21:45 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-28 17:36 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-27 10:36 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-27 16:54 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-27 16:08 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-05-27 12:18 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-27 18:39 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-27 22:04 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-27 21:38 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-27 19:54 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-27 19:58 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-28 14:24 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-27 13:51 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 11:08 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 11:05 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-07-10 18:08 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 07:55 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-07-11 15:02 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-21 14:08 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-21 13:27 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-21 15:30 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-22 15:04 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-25 10:27 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-21 13:55 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-25 14:18 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 20:16 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-06 09:49 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-27 22:20 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-28 10:28 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-28 06:00 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-27 10:22 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-27 10:32 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-27 17:08 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Thomas Jahns <jahns@idontlikespam.dkrz.de> - 2015-05-28 15:49 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-28 15:03 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-28 14:35 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-28 16:54 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages jadill33@gmail.com - 2015-05-28 10:32 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Thomas Jahns <jahns@idontlikespam.dkrz.de> - 2015-05-29 10:17 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-27 10:40 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-27 19:56 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-27 13:46 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-27 21:16 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-27 15:47 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-27 14:08 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-27 22:11 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-27 20:10 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-28 02:21 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-28 03:21 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-05-27 22:17 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-27 22:22 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-28 14:52 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-27 18:55 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-27 15:31 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-05-25 12:11 +0300
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-25 11:04 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-25 12:30 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-25 15:41 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-25 15:20 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-24 10:57 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-25 14:31 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-25 22:30 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-25 17:56 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-29 12:34 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-29 14:04 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Alain Ketterlin <alain@universite-de-strasbourg.fr.invalid> - 2015-05-29 15:28 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-05 15:18 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-29 15:31 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-17 15:35 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-17 07:56 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-17 16:14 +0100
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-17 12:57 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-17 15:46 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-18 11:10 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-18 08:56 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-18 18:09 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-18 18:03 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-18 14:41 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-17 15:39 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-17 13:58 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-13 19:17 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Nathan Wagner <nw@hydaspes.if.org> - 2015-05-14 09:54 +0000
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-14 08:57 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-14 08:31 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-14 08:33 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-05-14 14:37 +1200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-14 13:13 +0200
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-15 16:26 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-13 18:44 -0500
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2015-06-21 12:46 -0400
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-22 07:37 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-12 11:23 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-12 13:08 -0700
                Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-22 06:32 -0700
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-28 12:30 -0700
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Dow Allen <gmail@jamesdowallen.nospam> - 2015-04-29 04:07 +0000
        Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-30 07:48 -0700
  Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-25 03:32 -0700
    Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-26 09:33 +0100
      Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-26 07:37 -0700
  Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-25 04:01 -0700

csiph-web