procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Procmail suggestion for ! recipe action

1995-12-19 11:42:35
srb(_at_)cuci(_dot_)nl (Stephen R. van den Berg) said:

SRvdB> Only if you want to be an MUA.  If you want to be an MTA, RFC 822
SRvdB> explicitly denies you to add them.

        Well, I don't read it that way, but if so, I guess my argument
is with the RFC then. ;)  Since sendmail does it the same way with
.forward, there is obviously no requirement to put it in, which is,
IMNSHO, a bad thing when receiving mis-redirected mail.

SRvdB> What if the Resent-* fields are already there?

        Old-Resent-* .

SRvdB> There are too many decisions that need to be made before adding
SRvdB> those fields.  The only way to give the user complete control
SRvdB> over these decisions is by leaving it up to the user to fit in a
SRvdB> suitable call to formail.

        Yeah, I suppose.  It's just that I'd prefer code bloat than
process bloat, but after looking at procmail's main-function-from-hell,
I can understand why you want to leave it as much alone as possible. ;)

-- 
#include <disclaimer.h>                         /* Sten Drescher */
To get my PGP public key, send me email with your public key and
        Subject: PGP key exchange
Key fingerprint =  90 5F 1D FD A6 7C 84 5E  A9 D3 90 16 B2 44 C4 F3

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>