procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Return-Path: question

1997-06-06 12:28:00
On Fri, 6 Jun 1997, Bill Moseley wrote:

I used to filter the procmail list by the header:
Return-Path: <procmail-request(_at_)Informatik(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE>

Ditto, old chap!

But the last few days I have been receiving some messages that don't have
the Return-Path header.  Am I correct that the Return-Path header is placed
on the message by the local mail system?

Possibly...  I find the above "bug" on only TWO of the many list I am on
now, and they're both quite active...  One is Procmail, naturally.

By the look of the headers it seems that Netcom is using different sendmail
versions on different mailhosts.

Correct, but this is a matter for the netcom.shell.* hierarchy groups, my
thinks.

My question:  Is the Return-Path an optional header, and is it something I
shouldn't rely on in my procmail recipes?  Is the "From_" header a better
and more reliable choice?

Be interested to know what you hear here, if not ON the list.

Is Netcom really using beta software for its paying customers?

Looks like it!  -Let's complain!!!

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