from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1])
	by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7D3116F03
	for <jm@localhost>; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 11:23:21 +0100 (IST)
from jalapeno [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 10 Sep 2002 11:23:21 +0100 (IST)
from listman.spamassassin.taint.org (listman.spamassassin.taint.org [66.187.233.211]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8A3C3C14737 for
    <jm-exmh@jmason.org>; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 04:12:03 +0100
from listman.spamassassin.taint.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by
    listman.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D85A40B63; Mon,  9 Sep 2002
    23:10:53 -0400 (EDT)
from int-mx1.corp.spamassassin.taint.org (int-mx1.corp.spamassassin.taint.org
    [172.16.52.254]) by listman.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1355B40BB1
    for <exmh-users@listman.redhat.com>; Mon,  9 Sep 2002 23:07:10 -0400 (EDT)
(from mail@localhost) by int-mx1.corp.spamassassin.taint.org (8.11.6/8.11.6)
    id g8A375S32417 for exmh-users@listman.redhat.com; Mon, 9 Sep 2002
    23:07:05 -0400
from mx1.spamassassin.taint.org (mx1.spamassassin.taint.org [172.16.48.31]) by
    int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g8A374m32413 for
    <exmh-users@redhat.com>; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 23:07:04 -0400
from dimebox.bmc.com (adsl-66-140-152-233.dsl.hstntx.swbell.net
    [66.140.152.233]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id
    g8A2ojv25839 for <exmh-users@redhat.com>; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 22:50:45 -0400
by dimebox.bmc.com (Postfix, from userid 1205) id 90F5D38DA9;
    Mon,  9 Sep 2002 22:07:03 -0500 (CDT)
from dimebox (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dimebox.bmc.com
    (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8455538DA2; Mon,  9 Sep 2002 22:07:03 -0500 (CDT)
In-reply-to Rick Baartman <baartman@lin12.triumf.ca> message
    dated "Mon, 09 Sep 2002 16:54:08 -0700."
From exmh-users-admin@redhat.com  Tue Sep 10 11:23:22 2002

>>>>> On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, "Rick" == Rick Baartman wrote:
Rick> This is dangerous; I have to remember to re-scan each
Rick> folder I enter. Is there a safeguard for this?
Nope.  Regenerate the cache in the script