On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 05:41:10PM -0600, Aaron Schrab (dis)graced my inbox with:
> At 15:41 -0700 30 Oct 2001, Rob 'Feztaa' Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is that what mail would look like with it off? I guess the reason I
> > don't have this problem has more to do with my mutt config than with my
> > postfix config! I had my_hdr's setting the From: and Reply-To:
> > headers, which would avoid that envelope_from problem altogether.
>
> No, it wouldn't. When $envelope_from is not set (the default), using
> "my_hdr From:" will only set the From: header. Same for the $from
> setting. The contents of the Reply-To: header are totally irrelevant.
>
> The address that AOL and many other places check is the envelope sender.
> This is often placed in the the "From " (note the space) line of mbox
> folders, or possibly a Return-Path: header. If $envelope_from is set,
> mutt will attempt to use whatever address is in the From: header for
> this as well. If $envelope_from is not set, mutt relies on your MTA to
> choose the envelope sender address by itself.
>
> The intended use for $envelope_from is to allow people to fully vary the
> address that they use, especially for posting to mailing lists that
> check if the envelope sender is a subscriber. Working around broken MTA
> configs is only a somewhat nice side benefit. But, even with this it's
> still a good idea to fix the MTA config, since there may be other
> programs on your system that send mail.
Ah! I get it now ;)
Yeah, actually now that you say it, closer inspection of my headers says
that my return path header used to be [EMAIL PROTECTED] (address to
me on my local machine, I don't use it because my machine is commonly
off), but now it's [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks :)
--
Rob 'Feztaa' Park
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
"The most overlooked advantage of owning a computer is that if they
foul up, there's no law against whacking them around a bit."
-- Eric Porterfield
