On Wed, Nov 08, 2000 at 09:27:37AM -0600, JT Williams wrote:
> > -: set envelope_from
>
> > Ok, that did the trick. Thanks!
>
> Well, maybe I spoke too soon.
>
> It's true that the list servers I was having problems with are
> now recognizing me, but our SysAdmin tells me there are still
> problems (see his explanation below). Is this really a problem?
> I'd like to keep using mutt/IMAP if I could.... TIA/jtw
> -------
> MUTT seems to use normal sendmail channels to send messages rather
> than connecting directly to the IMAP server. We run in a full IMAP
> environment (/var/mail is not mounted to client machines and clients
> do not run sendmail daemon).
>
> This results in the sender's address being set to user@localhost
> regardless of what MUTT settings are changed. The final header
> shows the sender's address as being from the workstation MUTT was
> running on rather than the mail server. In this respect, it behaves
> exactly like "mailx".
That's absolutely true[1]. Because mutt is run on a unix-a-like it knows there
will be tools available to send mail on the local system rather than having
to connect to another.
This means that there will be a line in your sent email which is:
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Which wouldn't break anything were it not for the Outlooks.
The Outlooks appear to take the Sender: line as the From: line and completely
balls everything up -- I'm sure it's breaking a spec. or something.
Anyway. You can configure your machine's mta to set the envelope/sender
address or, I suppose, put a reply-to: in. I don't know which will work
best.
Oh, and it's not a problem. If he's a real sysadmin the only thing he could
be concerned about is that the name of your machine is being told to a lot
of people.
[1] assuming that where he talks about using the IMAP server to send mail he
means it's running an MTA as well as an IMAP server.
