Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by hyperreal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA21730;
	Tue, 3 Jun 1997 12:23:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scanner.worldgate.com (scanner.worldgate.com [198.161.84.3])
	by hyperreal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA21716
	for <new-httpd@hyperreal.com>; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 12:23:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from znep.com (uucp@localhost)
	by scanner.worldgate.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with UUCP id NAA28135
	for new-httpd@hyperreal.com; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:23:10 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from localhost (marcs@localhost) by alive.znep.com (8.7.5/8.7.3)
 with SMTP id NAA27307 for <new-httpd@hyperreal.com>;
 Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:23:56 -0600 (MDT)
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:23:55 -0600 (MDT)
From: Marc Slemko <marcs@znep.com>
To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com
Subject: Ack: Changed information for PR os-dgux/651  (fwd)
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970603132245.27034C-100000@alive.znep.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org

This is one case (broken mailer sending autoreply to From: address) where
having the changes be from apbugs would have created a mail loop.  I'm not
overly fond of the idea. 

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 13:18:31 -0600
From: "Daniel O Winkless, District Computer Specialist, Albuquerque, NM "
     <wink@usgs.gov>
To: marc@hyperreal.com
Subject: Ack: Changed information for PR os-dgux/651 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Your message has been read.