On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Philip Guenther wrote:
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 08:59:22 -0500
From: Philip Guenther <guenther(_at_)gac(_dot_)edu>
To: Klaus Wacker <wacker(_at_)Physik(_dot_)Uni-Dortmund(_dot_)DE>
Cc: Procmail <procmail(_at_)Informatik(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE>
Subject: Re: spurious "from" - whose bug is it?
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 17:01:19 +0200 (MET DST)
That's strange. The manpages on my system have a slightly different
version of the above:
If there is no Content-Length: field or the -Y option has
been specified and procmail appends to regular mailfolders,
any lines in the body of the message that look like post-
marks are prepended with `>' (disarms bogus mailheaders).
The regular expression that is used to search for these
You are right, I was looking at the manpage of an older version.
If your MUAs don't understand Content-Length: headers, than procmail
should be invoked with the -Y flag. Note: the -Y flag only affectes
procmail's behavior when it's writing to regular mailfolders.
I have been seriously bitten by this. Somebody once sent me as
postmaster a message which contained a sample message (complete with
From_ header of course) from my site about which he complained. His MUA
(elm, IIRC) generated a Content-Length: field and didn't escape the
From_. My procmail saw the Content-Length: and didn't either. My pine
ignores Content-Length:, but it doesn't take just any for '^From '. As
far as I know, it requires a preceding empty line and something that
looks like an address and a date and nothing else on that line. But that
was of course the case. So I saw some rather confusing messages in my
incoming mail, which added to the confusion my mail system was in at
that time already.
Fix your invocation of procmail to have the -Y flag.
Done. It works now. Thanks.
Klaus Wacker wacker(_at_)Physik(_dot_)Uni-Dortmund(_dot_)DE
Experimentelle Physik V http://www.physik.uni-dortmund.de/~wacker
Universitaet Dortmund Tel.: +49 (231) 755 3587
D-44221 Dortmund Fax: +49 (231) 755 3569