Re: Problem with Smail
Marcus Brinkmann typed: [Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > Lars Hallberg writes: > > > I think smail refuses to rewrite the from: field. > > > > Putting > > > > from_field="From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ($fullname)" > > > > in /etc/smail/config works for me. > > I have the same line in my /etc/smail/config, but I feel *VERY* sick about > it, because *EVERY* mail gets this From: field. No! The From: field must be > user dependent, or there is something wrong. But after spending too much There is a field, $user i think, that equals whatever should be to the left of the @ symbol. This may do what you want. - Craig -- // /\ | | | Craig Small VK2XLZ @home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ||==||===|==|=| [44.136.13.17] @play: [EMAIL PROTECTED] \\ \/ | | | finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP key!
Re: Problem with Smail
[EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: > Lars Hallberg writes: > > I think smail refuses to rewrite the from: field. > > Putting > > from_field="From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ($fullname)" > > in /etc/smail/config works for me. With some versions of smail, you cannot do any substitution. I suspect you have a "good" version and the other poster has a "bad" version. The above line wouldn't of worked on a version I use to run. I haven't tried it out on this current one. If there is interest, I'll give it a go. - Craig -- // /\ | | | Craig Small VK2XLZ @home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ||==||===|==|=| [44.136.13.17] @play: [EMAIL PROTECTED] \\ \/ | | | finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP key!
Re: Problem with Smail
On Mar 20, Hamish Moffatt wrote > > It is. Due to unclarity wrt ITAR for packages with hooks for crypto, > > such as mutt, the Debian mutt packages resides on debian-non-US sites > > nowadays. I've reported a bug against ftp.debian.org to get the old > > package removed. > > Which is odd, because the mutt web page states that the author (who > resides in the US), does not want mutt exported from the US. Odd that > Debian takes it outside the US, and then won't let it be exported back. As > I understand it, you should be able to import mutt (or any such weapons > :-) just fine, but not re-export it. It is difficult to prevent such re-export. My preferred way would be to have 'US-only' sites, where you can get mutt, pgp-us etc., but which take some precautions, say like the mutt homesite does (you can download mutt from the homesite from outside the US, but it resides in a subdir of an unreadable US-only directory, whose name is in the README.us-only, thus making sure that you are aware of the problems). > I tried to get 0.65 (beta) to compile here on Solaris, but none of the US > sites would let me have it and none of the non-US sites had it yet. I always put a copy on ftp://ftp.wi.LeidenUniv.nl/pub/linux/devel-ray Greetings, Ray -- Obsig: developing a new sig
Re: Problem with Smail
On Mar 03, 1997 at 01:52:34PM +0100, J.H.M.Dassen wrote: > On Mar 19, Alexander Koch wrote > > So you may see what Mutt is like. But you should be careful. I'd say: > > stick with the Debian- MUTT- Package and you're fine. It's not as news as > > the real MUTT but it _works_ (believe me, it's a bit tricky to make it > > It is. Due to unclarity wrt ITAR for packages with hooks for crypto, such as > mutt, the Debian mutt packages resides on debian-non-US sites nowadays. I've > reported a bug against ftp.debian.org to get the old package removed. Which is odd, because the mutt web page states that the author (who resides in the US), does not want mutt exported from the US. Odd that Debian takes it outside the US, and then won't let it be exported back. As I understand it, you should be able to import mutt (or any such weapons :-) just fine, but not re-export it. Most of non-US though is software which uses RSA, which I understand US users can't use because they use free RSA stuff, while USA has patented RSA. (Must be a good point of discussion for the LPF people?) I tried to get 0.65 (beta) to compile here on Solaris, but none of the US sites would let me have it and none of the non-US sites had it yet. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Melbourne, Australia. Student, computer science & computer systems engineering. 3rd year, RMIT. http://yallara.cs.rmit.edu.au/~moffatt CPOM: [ ] 40% PGP key available from web page above.
Re: Problem with Smail
On Mar 19, Alexander Koch wrote > So you may see what Mutt is like. But you should be careful. I'd say: > stick with the Debian- MUTT- Package and you're fine. It's not as news as > the real MUTT but it _works_ (believe me, it's a bit tricky to make it It is. Due to unclarity wrt ITAR for packages with hooks for crypto, such as mutt, the Debian mutt packages resides on debian-non-US sites nowadays. I've reported a bug against ftp.debian.org to get the old package removed. > work sometimes). Basically, the Debian mutt package is simply the latest non-developer release (i.e. one announced on mutt-announce), with all bugfix patches that apply cleanly, and a matching Muttrc. > Otherwise if you install it by hand and want to use it, you are better off > following the mutt-users mailing list, there're still too much bugfixes and > expermintal patches flying around. Remember: MUTT is still alpha software! > Well, besides the point ELM 2.5 beta is _without_ PGP support at all > there's only one choice for me. And please don't mention PINE, thanks. ,-) The Debian elm-me+ package has PGP support. Greetings, Ray -- Tevens ben ik van mening dat Nederland overdekt dient te worden.
Re: Problem with Smail
On Mar 19, Marcus Brinkmann wrote : Hello! : : I have the same line in my /etc/smail/config, but I feel *VERY* sick about : it, because *EVERY* mail gets this From: field. No! The From: field must be : user dependent, or there is something wrong. But after spending too much : time about too much documentations, I didn't find a solution. Perhaps : anybody out there can help? This will be very appriciated. Try: echo 'testmail' | /usr/sbin/smail somewhereout and have a look into the files in /var/spool/smail/incoming or whereever your mail gets relayed. (Probably you should set the `queue_only' config variable, or add the ?? option for queue_only to the above line.) : (If it is of interest for this subject, I use elm but will try mutt soon) ... mutt seems to be really cool, for elm users. Heiko -- private: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp: A1 7D F6 7B 69 73 48 35 E1 DE 21 A7 A8 9A 77 92 finger : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problem with Smail
Hello! [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > Lars Hallberg writes: > > I think smail refuses to rewrite the from: field. > > Putting > > from_field="From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ($fullname)" > > in /etc/smail/config works for me. I have the same line in my /etc/smail/config, but I feel *VERY* sick about it, because *EVERY* mail gets this From: field. No! The From: field must be user dependent, or there is something wrong. But after spending too much time about too much documentations, I didn't find a solution. Perhaps anybody out there can help? This will be very appriciated. (If it is of interest for this subject, I use elm but will try mutt soon) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problem with Smail
Lars Hallberg writes: > I think smail refuses to rewrite the from: field. Putting from_field="From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ($fullname)" in /etc/smail/config works for me. -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED]Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address.
Re: Problem with Smail
"Jonathan A. Buzzard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > now connected via modem. It delivers mail fine *except* the "From:" field= > =2E > > Instead of reading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I get <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Having read Just a thought, but what's your machine's entry in hosts? I have a similar config at home and my hosts looks like... 207.3.132.200 glasgow.lancaster.mxglasgow And my mail comes out as from "glasgow.lancaster.mx" just fine. I send it from Emacs, which grabs the host name as "glasgow.lancaster.mx". Now, my guess is that if I had just "glasgow" in hosts, I'd get the same problem as you. What Lars Hallberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said would, I think, back this up. Hope that helps, Graeme -- | Graeme A Stewart, pgp public key finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]| | Key fingerprint = AF C7 BF A4 52 D5 3C 3B 17 A5 62 43 DA 15 E8 97 | | "Keep a good head, and always carry a lightbulb." Dylan |
Re: Problem with Smail
I think smail refuses to rewrite the from: field. So, if Your mail app is adding a from: field smail will leave it unchanged. You have to make your mail app add the right from: field (or non att all) to fix it. If You find any other solution, please tell me HTH /Lars In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jonathan A. Buzzard" writes: > > Hi, > > After using Debian 0.93R6 for some 18 months, I took the opportunity of > installing a bigger hard disk in my laptop to install 1.2 from the cover > CD of Linux World. There where a few problems on the install, but most of= > > the ones I found seem to have been fixed, and everything is running = > > smoothly now. > > Except I decided to go with smail rather than sendmail, as it is the > recomended mail delivery agent, and sendmail seemed overkill for a system= > > now connected via modem. It delivers mail fine *except* the "From:" field= > =2E > > Instead of reading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I get <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Having read > all the avaliable documentation (bug report "man smailconfig" reports no > manual entry) it would appear that in /etc/smail/config the option > visible_name should read hex.prestel.co.uk which surprise surprise it doe= > s. > > I have since fiddled with every possible option that could conceivably ha= > ve > anything to do with this problem, all without result. It is now a week > later and I am getting board with editing entries in /var/spool/smail/inp= > ut > to get outgoing mail correct. > > Ideas? > > > JAB. > > > -- = > > Jonathan A. Buzzard, > 34 Kepwell Road, Prudhoe, Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Northumberland. NE42 6PD Tel: +44(0)1661-832195 > United Kingdom > >
