On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 16:58:16 -0700, Dave Close said: > When I use Bcc with exmh, the recipient receives a *text* copy of my > entire message -- including all headers, MIME parts, and attachments. > Most are completely dumbfounded by this and unable to make sense of > the message.
I'm not surprised in the least. I'm wondering if this isn't a case where it isn't really a 'send' in the nmh sense, but a 'forw -mime'.... > I would think that the only difference that should occur > between a Bcc and an original is that the recipient's address not > appear in the message headers and be used only for the SMTP operation. That *is* what the Principle of Least Surprise and the applicable RFCs say should happen. > Am I missing something? It's always possible that exmh is misbehaving. I'll look into it later this evening. A quick perusal shows that there's nothing in the exmh code that behaves differently if a bcc: is found. So the problem is more subtle than that... (And a quick test with nmh showed something I don't understand on *that* side of the fence too...) One quick question: If using command-line nmh to do a bcc: works, can you send me the send: and post: entries (if any) from .mh_profile (feel free to sanitize passwords/etc), and the release of exmh and nmh you're using?
pgp6gZW0TTOFP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Exmh-users mailing list Exmh-users@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/exmh-users
