Re: Bug in mutt's detection of recipients on command line
Using a large mallet, David T-G whacked out: > Now, if you're trying to use baz.com as a relay to send mail to foo@bar > through that site, you want the good old "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" grammar. > You'll also want to smack whoever is running baz.com for having an open > relay :-) If baz.com is yours, then teach bar about sendmail smart hosts > and don't use a relay at all. Especially if baz.com has something like (assuming sendmail) CO @ % ! That would just prohibit such relaying hacks by restricting their use in local parts. If one of these is put back in, you stand the risk of being abused by some spambag or the other ... lots of spamware mail clients are _designed_ to send mail using such pathing hacks. > Once you figure out exactly what you're trying to do you ought to be able > to move forward; if not, explain it to us and we'll try to help. I think he's definitely trying to relay through baz.com to foo@bar - % is just one of hte possible pathing hacks he can use. -- Suresh Ramasubramanian + [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lumber Cartel of India + You spamma my mailbox, I nukea da ass I used to think I was indecisive, but now I'm not so sure.
Re: Bug in mutt's detection of recipients on command line
Charles -- ...and then Charles Cazabon said... % Hello, % % I seem to have found a bug in mutt, when using 'mutt recipient_address' from % the commandline. Minimal test case follows: Nope; I don't think so. % % [charon]$ mutt foo@[EMAIL PROTECTED] % % No recipients specified. That's because that's not a valid email address. We can't expect mutt to be *too* verbose :-) % % It works fine with zero or one '@' signs in an address; anything more causes That's because that's the defined format for email addresses. I expect you'll find the same results with any other mail program, too. Now, if you're trying to use baz.com as a relay to send mail to foo@bar through that site, you want the good old "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" grammar. You'll also want to smack whoever is running baz.com for having an open relay :-) If baz.com is yours, then teach bar about sendmail smart hosts and don't use a relay at all. % it to quit. This is causing problems for some scripts I've got which use % mutt to send mail because of its attachment-handling capabilities. The number of '@'s in an address should have nothing to do with attachments, which you indicate with -a on the command line. See the manual or `mutt -h`. % % Any easy workaround? Once you figure out exactly what you're trying to do you ought to be able to move forward; if not, explain it to us and we'll try to help. % % Charles % -- % --- % Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> % GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ % Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. % --- :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bigfoot.com/~davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! The "new millennium" starts at the beginning of 2001. There was no year 0. Note: If bigfoot.com gives you fits, try sector13.org in its place. *sigh* PGP signature
Re: Bug in mutt's detection of recipients on command line
On Thu, Sep 21, 2000, Charles Cazabon wrote: > I seem to have found a bug in mutt, when using 'mutt recipient_address' from > the commandline. Minimal test case follows: > > [charon]$ mutt foo@[EMAIL PROTECTED] That's not a valid address. > It works fine with zero or one '@' signs in an address; anything more causes > it to quit. This is causing problems for some scripts I've got which use > mutt to send mail because of its attachment-handling capabilities. > > Any easy workaround? Use valid addresses?
Bug in mutt's detection of recipients on command line
Hello, I seem to have found a bug in mutt, when using 'mutt recipient_address' from the commandline. Minimal test case follows: [charon]$ mutt foo@[EMAIL PROTECTED] No recipients specified. [charon]$ mutt -v Mutt 1.2i (2000-05-09) Copyright (C) 1996-2000 Michael R. Elkins and others. Mutt comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `mutt -vv'. Mutt is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it under certain conditions; type `mutt -vv' for details. System: Linux 2.2.16-3 [using slang 10202] Compile options: -DOMAIN +DEBUG -HOMESPOOL -USE_SETGID -USE_DOTLOCK +USE_FCNTL -USE_FLOCK +USE_IMAP +USE_GSS -USE_SSL +USE_POP +HAVE_REGCOMP -USE_GNU_REGEX +HAVE_COLOR +HAVE_PGP -BUFFY_SIZE -EXACT_ADDRESS +ENABLE_NLS SENDMAIL="/usr/sbin/sendmail" MAILPATH="/var/spool/mail" SHAREDIR="/etc" SYSCONFDIR="/etc" -ISPELL It works fine with zero or one '@' signs in an address; anything more causes it to quit. This is causing problems for some scripts I've got which use mutt to send mail because of its attachment-handling capabilities. Any easy workaround? Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
