Ketil Malde ketil+haskell at
Thu Dec 16 02:44:06 EST 2004

Kenny Chamber <kenny at> writes:

> How long after posting should it take for a message to appear on the
> list?

It should be pretty fast, but some lists moderate posts by
non-subscribers.  Could this be your problem?

For timing, we could look at your headers:

        Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 07:33:39 +0300
        From: Kenny Chamber <kenny at>

You sent it today, at 07:33:39 +0300 (4:33 UTC).  Early bird, huh?

    Received: from [] (
	[] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0)
	by (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iBG4Xgt8098072
	for <glasgow-haskell-users at>; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 04:33:44 GMT

5 seconds later, it is at, presumably your outgoing
mail server.

    Received: from ( [])
	by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DD51368816
	for <glasgow-haskell-users at>;
	Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:21:54 -0500 (EST) gets it the day before, but is on the American east
coast. I make it 4:21 UTC, though, so one of you isn't running NTP
like he or she should.

     Delivery-date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 05:33:52 +0100

I don't know who adds this.

     Received: from (localhost.localdomain [])
	by (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 50D48368835; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:21:56 -0500 (EST)
     Received: from ([]:53008

(So - what's *really* the name of this computer?)

	by with esmtp (Exim 4.30)
	id 1CenKp-0002qk-8z
	for ketil+haskell at; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 05:33:51 +0100

Ends up in my inbox at 05:33:51, subtract one hour if you want UTC.
The full trip done in twelwe seconds.  If we trust the timestamps to
have that good resolution.

If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants

More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list