On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 01:16:24PM +0300, Alexander Gattin wrote: > I tried my best to not give a clueless advice this > time, so before suggesting to omit the user@ part > from smtp_url I studied the mutt-1.5.20/smtp.c > source:
> if (conn->account.flags & M_ACCT_USER) > { > if (!mutt_bit_isset (Capabilities, AUTH)) > { > mutt_error (_("SMTP server does not support authentication")); > mutt_sleep (1); > return -1; > } > > #ifdef USE_SASL > if (!(conn->account.flags & M_ACCT_PASS) && option (OPTNOCURSES)) > { > mutt_error (_("Interactive SMTP authentication not supported")); > mutt_sleep (1); > return -1; > } > return smtp_auth (conn); > #else > mutt_error (_("SMTP authentication requires SASL")); > mutt_sleep (1); > return -1; > #endif /* USE_SASL */ > } > > I concluded that mutt omits SMTP authentication if > and only if M_ACCT_USER is missing from > account.flags (user@ part missing from smtp_url). > > -- > With best regards, > xrgtn Service above and beyond the call of duty! I hope you didn't spend too much time on it. I don't know if you were the one who mentioned msmtp--thanks to whomever, though. I'll be staying with it. -- Dave Williams d...@eskimo.com