[I wrote]
> > Dumb question:  why won't MIME work with existing settings, such
> > as IETFHDR?
> >
> > People using the other headings *probably* can't handle MIME anyway,
> > so why do you want to forcibly set them to something where they may
> > not be able to see *ANY* headers?
 
[Roger wrote]]
> MIME will work with IETFHDR and FULLHDR, but not SHORTHDR.
 
Given that, the original poster *might* want to think about changing
only those having SHORTHDR to FULLHDR.  With that in mind, your
previous suggestion was:
   QUIET SET listname REPRO FULLHDR ACK FOR *@*
I don't think the idea was to change REPRO or ACK for anyone, so
let's assume not, and go to:
   QUIET SET listname FULLHDR FOR *@*
 
I can't tell if something like the following might work:
   QUIET SET listname WITH SHORTHDR FULLHDR FOR *@*
but I suspect not!  :-)  That's probably what's desired.  One
could do a query for "with shorthdr", parse the result with a simple
script, generating a mail message with the commands, and then send
that back to listserv, however.
 
My presumption is that anyone who set IETFHDR or DUALHDR had a reason
for doing so, and those shouldn't be changed.
 
> Prior to
> LISTSERV 1.8b, SHORTHDR was the default.  In 1.8b, FULLHDR became the
> default, but those subscribers who subscribed before the installation
> of 1.8b still have SHORTHDR as their setting (assuming the list was
> taking the default).
>
> I don't understand your comment about not being able to see any headers
> with FULLHDR.
 
That comes from looking at the description of DUALHDR in the
document obtained from listserv with the "INFO LISTOWNR" command.
Mine says "Last update: May 24th, 1995"
 
I don't want to quote it here -- it's on a different machine -- but
check out "5.3.5. Options for mail headers of incoming postings."
It describes DUALHDR which inserts headers *into the body* so
that users of more primitive mail systems can see them.  Such mail
systems would undoubtedly be MIME-unaware anyway.  They get short
headers *plus* the headers inserted into the body.  I don't know
whether or not this might have been changed to full headers plus
headers inserted into the body, or not, with 1.8b.
 
I can't conceive of "damage" from changing SHORTHDR to FULLHDR for most
people, I'll concede, though maybe it will consume extra disk space
when they're really tight!  Frankly, though, in general, I have this
philosophical thing about changing things which are documented as
"user-settable" without good reason.  (Setting DIGEST or NOMAIL because
the owner is getting bounces is "good reason," for example, IMHO.)
 
Hope that explains my view.
 
Cheers,
Stan.