Fw: failure notice
Does everyone else get this failure notice whenever they post to the group??
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 8:03 PM
Subject: failure notice
> Hi. This is the qmail-send program at webmail1.sonnet.de.
> I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following
> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
> The users maildir is over the allowed quota (size).
> --- Below this line is a copy of the message.
> Return-Path: <email@example.com>
> Received: (qmail 29832 invoked by uid 1011); 19 Jul 2000 00:03:57 -0000
> Received: from ns2.sonnet.de ([188.8.131.52]) (envelope-sender <>)
> by webmail1.sonnet.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP
> for <>; 19 Jul 2000 00:03:57 -0000
> Received: (qmail 26146 invoked by uid 1014); 19 Jul 2000 00:03:13 -0000
> Received: from sam.julianhaight.com ([184.108.40.206]) (envelope-sender
> by webmail2.sonnet.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
> for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; 19 Jul 2000 00:03:13 -0000
> Received: (from nobody@localhost)
> by sam.julianhaight.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) id e6J03qP28649
> for email@example.com; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 20:03:52 -0400
> Received: from kp8.kpsnet.net (kp8.kpsnet.net [220.127.116.11])
> by sam.julianhaight.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e6J03f628510
> for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 20:03:41 -0400
> Received: (from bin@localhost)
> by kp8.kpsnet.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id CAA24604
> for email@example.com; Wed, 19 Jul 2000 02:05:50 +0200
> Received: from murphy.debian.org (murphy.debian.org [18.104.22.168]) by
kp8.kpsnet.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA24588 for <firstname.lastname@example.org>;
Wed, 19 Jul 2000 02:05:48 +0200
> Resent-Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 02:05:48 +0200
> Received: (qmail 20004 invoked by uid 38); 19 Jul 2000 00:03:09 -0000
> X-Envelope-Sender: email@example.com
> Received: (qmail 19913 invoked from network); 19 Jul 2000 00:03:02 -0000
> Received: from loomis.vermontel.net (22.214.171.124) by murphy.debian.org
with SMTP; 19 Jul 2000 00:03:02 -0000
> Received: from p2400 (oldschool.vermontel.net [126.96.36.199]) by
loomis.vermontel.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA67702; Tue, 18 Jul 2000
20:02:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from firstname.lastname@example.org)
> Message-Id: <[🔎] 007c01bff114$83428d40$c72ca73f@p2400>
> From: "Ethan Pierce" <email@example.com>
> To: "Frank Copeland" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Cc: <email@example.com>
> References: <[🔎] 39748F7F.B56410D1@thoughtform.com>
> Subject: Re: How stable is WINE?
> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 20:01:38 -0400
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Priority: 3
> X-Msmail-Priority: Normal
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
> X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
> Resent-Message-Id: <UehEb.A.O4E.7APd5@murphy>
> Resent-From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> X-Mailing-List: <email@example.com> archive/latest/99612
> X-Loop: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Precedence: list
> Resent-Sender: email@example.com
> X-Loop: firstname.lastname@example.org
> X-SpamCop-Bytes: 16976543
> In my opinion WINE isnt all its cracked up to be, but better than it has
> been in the past. If you want to run windows apps in linux, install
> (www.vmware.com). It runs VERY fast depending on how much virtual ram you
> can afford to allocate. I use 128mb for my virtual machines. Ive even
> execellent results with fullscreen windows media player under vmware.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Frank Copeland" <email@example.com>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 7:32 PM
> Subject: Re: How stable is WINE?
> > Cameron Matheson wrote:
> > >I'm waiting for the new Debian to come out, and I need some information
> > >about WINE. In Potato, how stable is WINE?
> > In my experience the wine currently in potato is as stable as any
> > wine I've used, and better than most. However, it is classified as alpha
> > software for a very good reason. It comes nowhere near running all
> > software. Each monthly snapshot improves some aspects but often breaks
> > something that worked previously; very much a two steps forward one step
> > back process.
> > >Does it run better than windoze? Also, What's the speed like, is it as
> > >fast as the app would run in windoze?
> > No and no. If it works at all with a given application then it works
> > enough, but you may have to work around an annoying bug or two (like
> > shift-clicking the mouse occasionally freezing the app or even crashing
> > Speed is sufficient considering the source is full of debugging code and
> > optimised in any way.
> > If you are looking for a general replacement for windows that runs
> > windows runs then expect to be disappointed. If you have a specific
> > application you need to use then the only way to find out if it will run
> > under wine is to try it. If you have trouble then ask for help on
> > <news:comp.emulators.ms-windows.wine>.
> > Frank
> > --
> > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe email@example.com <
> Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe firstname.lastname@example.org <