procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Problem solved! Need streamlining advice

2001-02-15 18:38:02
On 15 Feb, Philip Guenther wrote:
| Barton Hodges <barton(_at_)gcmcomputers(_dot_)com> writes:
| >I'm including the solution, the problem is listed below it.
| ...
| >  :0c
| >  * ! .*for <UserA(_at_)(_dot_)*>;
| >  * ! ^TO_UserA@
| >  { }
| >  :0cE
| >  UserA/in
| ...
| 
| As I've said on this list at least half a dozen times: THIS DOES NOT
| WORK RELIABLY.  Please read the following message for the details.
| 
|     http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/procmail/2001-11/msg00174.html
| 
| 
| (This is old news, folks.  For example, here's a posting I made *five
| years ago* on the topic:
|     http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/procmail/1996-02/msg00151.html
| 
| If there's some place we should put a warning about this that people
| would see before getting too far, please tell us where!)


There's an apparent typo in the first url which should probably be:

 http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/procmail/2000-11/msg00174.html

And not that Philip needs help, but here's a specific example. If I
telnet to either of my sendmail servers and issue 2 RCPT TO: commands
(i.e. 2 recipients) the "for username" tidbit in the Received: header
that this recipe depends on ain't there. Further, under the same
circumstance the server that's configured to insert an X-Envelope-To:
header doesn't do so. Now it's entirely possible that both of these are
due to deficiencies in the way I've configured them, but it illustrates
the difficulty in using headers to route mail. I can send a message to
multiple recipients on my network, have them all delivered successfully,
and *nowhere* does any username appear in any header.

Don Hammond



_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail

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