This post starts with a short disposal of the old topic, and then something
relevant to procmail will follow. Besides, Timothy directed replies to the
list.
When I said that people who want replies to their mail addressed a certain
way should use the Reply-To: header, Timothy Luoma responded,
| You are assuming that everyone has access to set the Reply-To line for all
| outgoing mail.
Damn straight I am. If they don't, they should use better mailers or more
compliant providers. I'm also assuming that they have computers and links to
the net. There are requirements for using the net, and I'm not going to bend
over backwards for those who expect the rest of the net population to make up
for what they won't do for themselves. Where does it stop? Unless you think
we should whistle into the modems of people who want to be on the net but re-
fuse to get telephone service, then you agree that there are limits to what
we are expected to do for people who demand that we go out of our way for them.
| This is not the case on one of my accounts.
Then use better software on it, or drop it.
Now, to the procmail-related part:
| It is also a ton harder to set the Reply-To on a per-message basis ...
That's where we get back into relevance to this list: if there were easier
hooks for running our OUTGOING mail through procmail, we could automate the
reply addresses by letting the rcfile for outgoing mail examine the headers
already existing and the body to see where Reply-To: should point. Then one
formail filter and we're set. Right now I'm in a position where, for a very
different reason, I need to add Reply-To: to many but not all of my outgoing
messages.
| I am attempting with this message to automatically set the procmail as
| Reply-To... if it works, I will be happy to accept it as an alternative.
It worked, and I have no hesitation honoring your chosen setting.