Subject: how to combine address lists?

From: "R. Russell Neuswanger" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 10:37:15 -0400 (EDT)

I have several address lists, with some overlap, that I want to 
pour into an overgroup that will get a single nickname. I could go into 
my sent-mail, each time I send something to an existing group, and use 
the take-address command to add to the overgroup -- if(!) I didn't mind 
waiting and could be sure to remember. But is there an efficient way?
	Related question: when I send a nonce message to two or three
groups, it seems pine chokes on any overlap (i.e., same name in two
groups). Is there an easy way to de-dup the to: list without going through
setting up an overgroup? 

R. R. Neuswanger, Ph.D., NRA life      Edel sei der Mensch,
Balto-Fennic, Germanic, Romance        Hilfreich und gut!
AcqBibSuppProj (ABSP), LC              Denn das allein
Washington, DC 20540-4120              Unterscheidet ihn ...
202.707.8747 (shared line)                  -- Goethe
[email-masked] or [email-masked]

No  teratobibliotic  entity   avows   *my*  emanations.

---

From: Steve Hubert <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 23:13:30 -0700 (PDT)

> waiting and could be sure to remember. But is there an efficient way?

An address list can have nicknames in the address field, so you can have
a list which is made up of other lists, for example

list       list1, list2

list1      a, b, c
list2      d, e, list3, list4, ...

The expansion isn't done until you use the list so additions to list1
will be reflected in list when you use it.  (but maybe you already knew
all that)

> groups). Is there an easy way to de-dup the to: list without going through

The working assumption was that the MTA would do the de-dup'ing of the
recipient list so that it wasn't necessary for Pine to attempt it.  For
example, sendmail will do this for you.  What is the nature of the choke?

> No  teratobibliotic  entity   avows   *my*  emanations.

Steve Hubert <[email-masked]>
Networks and Distributed Computing, Univ. of Washington, Seattle

---

From: "R. Russell Neuswanger" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 May 1995 07:25:42 -0400 (EDT)

> will be reflected in list when you use it.  (but maybe you already knew
	Well, let's say I expected it, having dealt with a lesser mailer 
internally. 

> example, sendmail will do this for you.  What is the nature of the choke?
	MTA? Mail Transport Something? What is it, & where?
	The choke appears to be in pine: I type a list of nicknames of 
lists into the TO: field, and when I cursor down, it fills up with error 
messages. I've only tried it once, and it looked such a mess to clean up 
that I forwent the message -- or rather, sent it to one group, and then 
forwarded it (with deletion of headers) to each other one separately out 
of my sent-mail. 
	Is there any problem, in your example, if e and list3 are both 
themselves nicknames? Or could I have fouled up somehow? (Do you need to 
use enter rather than down-arrow to expand, for instance?)

---

From: Steve Hubert <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 May 1995 09:03:46 -0700 (PDT)

> 	MTA? Mail Transport Something? What is it, & where?

Agent.  It is the program that transports the mail from one end to the
other, as opposed to a Mail User Agent (like Pine).  However, it sounds
like you're never getting to the MTA, so the problem is in pine or your
address book.

> use enter rather than down-arrow to expand, for instance?)

Should be no problem with e and list3 being nicknames, or down-arrow.
There is a problem if there is a loop in the lists.  For example:

list      list1, list2

list1     list3, list4

list3     list1

would be a problem because list1 refers to list3 which refers to
list1...  The loop might involve more than two lists, too.  The lists may
be nested arbitrarily deep but there can't be any loops or you'll get an
error.  If none of this explains the problem, feel free to send me an
address book (as an attachment) that exhibits the problem and I'll see if
I can understand it.  Thanks.

---

From: "R. Russell Neuswanger" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 May 1995 14:39:10 -0400 (EDT)

On Tue, 23 May 1995, Steve Hubert wrote:
> error.

	There must have been a loop in there somewhere, since edited out; 
I can't seem to make it do it again, even by combining the longest lists 
into one TO: field.
	But it's still good to know what to avoid, and how. For this help 
much thanks!