Hello -
I forward the e-mails arriving at account#1 to account#2. Sometimes,
however, the host of account#2 is down for some time and the senders of
e-mails get an error message. People don't know about account#2 and
shall not, and the whole thing of receiving a bounce from an address
they don't know with an e-mail addressed to me confuses them.
So, I thought of adding a Reply-To: address to forwarded e-mails, which
should act as a "collector" for any error bounces. I came up with two
versions of the recipe, and I'd like to ask you to comment on whether
the "Reply-To:" idea would work in general and which of my two
approaches is the correct one.
Version 1:
:0 c
* !^X-Loop: name(_at_)account1\(_dot_)com
| (formail -rI "Reply-To: name(_at_)account1(_dot_)com" \
-A "X-Loop: name(_at_)account1(_dot_)com") | !
name(_at_)account2(_dot_)com
Version 2:
:0
* !^X-Loop: name(_at_)account1\(_dot_)com
{
:0
| (formail -I "Reply-To: name(_at_)account1(_dot_)com" \
-A "X-Loop: name(_at_)account1(_dot_)com")
:0 c
! name(_at_)account2(_dot_)com
}
Thanks in advance!
--
CU,
Nick
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail