Stan Ryckman <stanr(_at_)sunspot(_dot_)tiac(_dot_)net> wrote:
dattier(_at_)wwa(_dot_)com (David W. Tamkin) wrote:
another; -ds will also split wherever it finds a clump of RFC822 headers
How big is a "clump?"
FORMAIL(1) FORMAIL(1)
-m minfields
Allows you to specify the number of consecutive
fields formail needs to find before it decides it
found the start of a new message, it defaults to 2.
My question is, is there a way to *not* split the forwarded
message? That included "From " is a killer, I think. I don't think
digests come with built-in "Content-Length:" headers. (This is
a majordomo list, if it matters).
If the digest generator is MIME compatible, it would contain
Content-Length fields (e.g. a SmartList managed mailinglist).
Other than that, it's hard to exclude this. The only thing you
could do is increase the threshold, but the included header seems
to be longer than the real one anyway.
It seems to me that any mail "forwarding" software that sends
a From_ header in the body unescaped and without a Content-Length:
header must be broken.
Content-Length: fields are something that needs to be taken care
of at the receiver's end. In case of a digest, that end lies at
the digest generator.
Does an RFC cover this? Should it?
No, not really.
And, shouldn't that RFC also cover the contents of digests?
MIME-digests regulate this fairly stringently. It's just that formail
doesn't attempt a complete MIME-parsing, it looks for header lookalikes
and takes Content-Length fields into account.
--
Sincerely,
srb(_at_)cuci(_dot_)nl
Stephen R. van den Berg (AKA BuGless).
"<Clarions sounding> *No one* expects the Spanish inquisition!"