On 2016-07-26 07:01:57 -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote: > * Vincent Lefevre <[email protected]> [07-26-16 06:52]: > > If I use > > > > set sendmail=/bin/false > > > > this is indeed wrong: each time I try to send the message, a copy of > > the message is stored in $record, which gives the false impression > > that the mail has been sent. > > so mutt becomes responsible for what sendmail does?
Mutt should store the message to the Sent folder *after* running sendmail and *only* if sendmail returned with a zero exit status. > I think not. If mutt's internal's fail to complete an action, it > should provide notice, but not an action after handing off. If mutt > hands off a mail to an app to provide a special format/action and > that "app" fails, the "app" would provide notice but mutt is not > responsible. Applications are responsible for checking the exit status of the processes they spawn. > If in this case sendmail or it's representative fails and provided > mutt notice, then mutt should act on that notice. The bug is that Mutt didn't act correctly[*] on that notice. [*] Mutt noticed the failure and notified the user as expected, but this failure didn't have any implication on the Sent folder. -- Vincent Lefèvre <[email protected]> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
