nmh-workers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] Bcc query...


From: David Levine
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] Bcc query...
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:37:06 -0500

I wrote:

> heymanj writes:
> 
> > I know all are giddy about the release of nmh 1.2 (will be compiling
> > it this weekend), but I am curious as to how to resolve the following
> > situation:
> >
> > On my office workstation, I use a different logon id than my email
> > address (as given to me by the corporation I work for).  I have solved
> > that by adding
> >
> > From: address@hidden
> > Reply-To: address@hidden
> >
> > to every one of the various *comp* files in ~/Mail/
> > I've also added
> >
> > masquerade: draft_from
> >
> > to /etc/nmh/mts.conf
> >
> > The problem seems to occur with Bcc in that I get the following:
> >
> > From: "<address@hidden>" <address@hidden>
> > To: undisclosed-recipients:;
> > Subject: $10 Linux answering machine
> > Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 14:33:40 -0500
> >
> > ------- Blind-Carbon-Copy
> >
> > To:
> > From: address@hidden
> > Reply-To: address@hidden
> > Subject: $10 Linux answering machine
> > Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 14:33:40 -0500
> >
> >
> > The problem is that if someone replies having received the message
> > on the Bcc, it gets sent to a non-deliverable email address.
> 
> Yup.  I've tripped over that myself recently.  I don't know
> the motivation for the current behavior, and can't think of a
> good reason for it.  My guess is that not many people use
> draft_from so it hasn't been noticed.
> 
> > Is this a MTA issue (not MUA)?
> > Am I missing something to configure?  Is this standard for the
> > appropriate RFCs?  Can nmh honor the From:/Reply-To: on a Bcc??
> 
> It's an nmh issue, and I don't see a way to configure around
> it.  Dcc: doesn't behave this way, but I want to use Bcc:.
> 
> nmh would honor From: on a Bcc with the patch below to
> post.c and spost.c.
> 
> It wouldn't be as simple to propagate Reply-To: through,
> but I don't think it's as important.  Especially because
> you're setting From: and Reply-To: to the same value.
> 
> Could this patch be considered for the upcoming release,
> please?

I committed it.

David


> > Thanks!
> >
> > jerry
> >
> > Proud MH/nmh since 1987
> >
> >        //  Jerry Heyman      | "Software is the difference between
> >       //   Amiga Forever :-) |  hardware and reality"
> >   \\ //    address@hidden   |
> >    \X/




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]