procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: A file server in procmail: advices required

1996-11-17 13:06:37
Stephane(_dot_)Bortzmeyer(_at_)globenet(_dot_)org (Stephane Bortzmeyer) writes:
A (At) 22:06 11/11/96, Philip Guenther \xE9crivait (wrote):
...
But it produces very different messages. The above rules sends a new
message, with new (and mostly empty) headers, which includes the old one.
Here is an example of your recipe's result send in the maintainer's
mailbox:

-----------

Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 19:08:58 +0100
From: listserv(_at_)mydomain(_dot_)org

From bin  Sun Nov 17 19:08:59 1996
Return-Path: <Stephane.Bortzmeyer>
Received: from (stephane(_at_)localhost)
         by foobar.mydomain.org (8.7.3/jtpda-5.1.2-b) id TAA01352
         ; Sun, 17 Nov 1996 19:08:58 +0100
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 19:08:58 +0100
Message-Id: <199611171808(_dot_)TAA01352(_at_)foobar(_dot_)mydomain(_dot_)org>
To: fileserver(_at_)mydomain(_dot_)org
From: bortzmeyer(_at_)mydomain(_dot_)org
Subject: send  toto
Precedence: junk
X-Diagnostic: ERROR: Not safe to reply (No reply sent)

----------

while I would like to have:

----------

Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 19:23:17 +0100
To: fileserver(_at_)mydomain(_dot_)org
From: bortzmeyer(_at_)mydomain(_dot_)org
Subject: send  toto
Precedence: junk
X-Diagnostic: ERROR: Not safe to reply (No reply sent)

----------


If you go through sendmail (which you were/are doing anyway), then you
cannot avoid the Received:, and Message-Id: headers, as sendmail adds
them to any message it touches, and it adds the Return-Path: header to
any message that it delivered locally.  If you really want to avoid
those headers you'll have to either a) deliver directly to that mailbox
from procmail, using formail to trim the unwanted headers; or b) run
the maintainers mail through procmail and have the headers trimmed
there.  Beware of trimming the 'From ' header if you store messages in
Berkeley mbox format, as that's what separates messages.

Philip Guenther

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