From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54526) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b5BLn-00033y-MB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 May 2016 08:22:20 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b5BLj-0001Vr-JC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 May 2016 08:22:19 -0400 Received: from [2a03:4000:1::4e2f:c7ac:d] (port=39472 helo=mail.weilnetz.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b5BLj-0001Vm-B9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 May 2016 08:22:15 -0400 From: Stefan Weil Message-ID: <57444772.3040305@weilnetz.de> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 14:22:10 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Qemu-devel] Bad signatures caused in some cases by mailman? List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: QEMU Developer Hi everybody, I noticed today a second developer on qemu-devel with signed e-mails which were not accepted by my Icedove mail reader (bcc sent to that person with good signatures until May 15 and bad ones since May 21). Obviously the mailing list software (mailman) systematically damages certain signed e-mails while most other signed e-mails pass without problems. In both cases older signed e-mails from the same person were fine while all later signed e-mails were bad, so maybe both persons changed a little detail in their personal work flow. It would be good to know what causes this problem and how to avoid (or better fix) it, because otherwise signed e-mails to qemu-devel are worthless. Regards, Stefan