Hi,
You guys seem to have already finished the thread and come up with a
patch, so maybe it's useless for me to add my comments now, but I'll
do so anyway. :-)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 01 Aug 2000:
> So I guess that since when I bounce a message the "From: " field doesn't contain any
>of
> my email addresses, the fact that I've set the variable $envelope_from
> doesn't lead to mutt forcing a correct "From " field, which I believe is the
> header field my ISP's SMTP server is looking at when it refuses the emails I
> bounce (since "From: " stays unchanged when bouncing).
Right. When you're bouncing a message, you don't want to be using the
address in the From: header as the envelope sender. If you did, and
the message you just bounced ended up bouncing from the new recipient,
then the *original* sender of the message would end up getting a copy.
Worse, if the original sender used a different address as the envelope
sender (eg. through a mailing list, or whatever) than what was in the
From:, the bounce would go to an unexpected address.
So you most definitely do not want $envelope_from to look at the From:
header when doing a bounce in Mutt. The Resent-From: header is the
correct address to use, like Marius did in his patch.
<nit>
There is no '"From " field' -- it's the envelope sender address. In the
mbox mail format, this address is stored in the mail separator line,
which begins with a "From ", but this is only related to the mbox folder
format and not to emails in general.
</nit>
> How can I tell mutt to use the right "From " field when "From: " contains an
> address which isn't on my $alternates list? my_hdr doesn't change the
> email's envelope, right? So what's left?
I use qmail with the QMAILUSER and QMAILHOST environment variables set
in the shell that starts Mutt. Works fine for me. You could play
tricks with a shell wrapper script, that *only* supplies a -f parameter
to your real sendmail program if one hasn't been given on the command
line already by Mutt.
But the better solution is to make Mutt behave properly in this case.
I still think there should be a way to specify the envelope sender
separately from the From: header, without resorting to changing stuff
in $sendmail or creating a wrapper script, but I do agree that having
$envelop_from is very useful and covers most of the situations...
Marius Gedminas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 01 Aug 2000:
> I have a similair problem -- bounced messages are lost and never reach
> the destination.
Some mail server looks at the envelope sender or something and just
discards them? Things like that are difficult to track... :-(
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Wed, 02 Aug 2000:
> But I just tested it and it seems to have a problem: "manually" doing the job
> $envelope_from performs isn't easy if you wish to have different "From "
> headers (based on "From:")...
That's the problem with changing $sendmail. :-( It would be easier if
there was a separate $envelope_sender variable (or something) which
could then be changed in send-hooks along with the From: header. But in
most cases setting $envelope_from is sufficient, indeed.
Marius Gedminas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Wed, 02 Aug 2000:
> Maybe something like this would help: this should make envelope from same as
> the added Resent-From: header.
To repeat myself, that sounds like the right approach.
Mikko
--
// Mikko Hänninen, aka. Wizzu // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // http://www.iki.fi/wiz/
// The Corrs list maintainer // net.freak // DALnet IRC operator /
// Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy & scifi, the Corrs /
"Unix: because reboots are for hardware upgrades!"
