Re: [rt-users] replacing/eliminating undisclosed recipients
Joseph, Have you read the info in RT_Config.pm? I believe it shows how to create your *friendly* To: format. Kenn LBNL On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Joseph Spenner joseph85...@yahoo.comwrote: --- On Tue, 9/21/10, Kevin Falcone falc...@bestpractical.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:04:28PM -0700, Joseph Spenner wrote: I'm using RT 3.8.8 with postfix 2.3.3, on CentOS 5.4 64bit. Are you sure about the postfix part (See below)? I noticed the sendmail messages in the logs as well (both postfix and sendmail messages), even though postfix is the only one running. So, I just now removed the sendmail packages from the system, and updated the RT_SiteConfig.pm with: Set($UseFriendlyToLine, 1); I no longer see sendmail messages/errors in the log. However, now the To: address (directed to watchers), looks like this: to: AdminCc of rtbox.mydomain.com Ticket #7:; instead of undisclosed recipients. It's different, but still suboptimal. :) Any more help would be great. Thanks! RT Training in Washington DC, USA on Oct 25 26 2010 Last one this year -- Learn how to get the most out of RT! RT Training in Washington DC, USA on Oct 25 26 2010 Last one this year -- Learn how to get the most out of RT!
Re: [rt-users] replacing/eliminating undisclosed recipients
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:49:20AM -0700, Joseph Spenner wrote: --- On Wed, 9/22/10, Kenneth Crocker kfcroc...@lbl.gov wrote: From: Kenneth Crocker kfcroc...@lbl.gov Subject: Re: [rt-users] replacing/eliminating undisclosed recipients To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com Date: Wednesday, September 22, 2010, 10:28 AM Joseph, Have you read the info in RT_Config.pm? I believe it shows how to create your friendly To: format. Kenneth: I saw that, but the syntax wasn't very clear to me. I see where I should set: Set($UseFriendlyToLine, 1); You could use the Format defined about 5 lines later in the config file, or see my earlier email in this thread about how to set a To: line for certain kinds of notifications. -kevin pgp75Y7afHcB9.pgp Description: PGP signature RT Training in Washington DC, USA on Oct 25 26 2010 Last one this year -- Learn how to get the most out of RT!
[rt-users] replacing/eliminating undisclosed recipients
I'm using RT 3.8.8 with postfix 2.3.3, on CentOS 5.4 64bit. When RT sends email, the To: address is populated with 'undisclosed recipients'. It doesn't really cause a problem unless people do reply all, which will cause the 'undisclosed recipients' to appear in the To: field of the reply. I read about using the: Set($UseFriendlyToLine, 0); entry in RT_SiteConfig.pm, but didn't have much luck. If I set it to 1, I see errors in my maillog: Sep 16 22:09:54 foobox sendmail[2555]: o8GM9sbP002555: o8GM9sbQ002555: DSN: AdminCc of foobox.mysite.com Ticket #10:;... List:; syntax illegal for recipient addresses Is there a way to make the To: field be the same as the From: field? If not, I'd be happy if I could make the To: field be nob...@mydomain.com, where I'd simply /dev/null it. Thanks! If life gives you lemons, keep them-- because hey.. free lemons. RT Training in Washington DC, USA on Oct 25 26 2010 Last one this year -- Learn how to get the most out of RT!
Re: [rt-users] replacing/eliminating undisclosed recipients
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:04:28PM -0700, Joseph Spenner wrote: I'm using RT 3.8.8 with postfix 2.3.3, on CentOS 5.4 64bit. Are you sure about the postfix part (See below)? When RT sends email, the To: address is populated with 'undisclosed recipients'. It doesn't really cause a problem unless people do reply all, which will cause the 'undisclosed recipients' to appear in the To: field of the reply. I read about using the: Set($UseFriendlyToLine, 0); entry in RT_SiteConfig.pm, but didn't have much luck. If I set it to 1, I see errors in my maillog: Sep 16 22:09:54 foobox sendmail[2555]: o8GM9sbP002555: o8GM9sbQ002555: DSN: AdminCc of foobox.mysite.com Ticket #10:;... List:; syntax illegal for recipient addresses This looks like a sendmail log, which is documented not to work with FriendlyToLIne Is there a way to make the To: field be the same as the From: field? If not, I'd be happy if I could make the To: field be nob...@mydomain.com, where I'd simply /dev/null it. Presumably you're not complaining that all email from RT lacks a To: line, but instead that mail to AdminCcs lacks a To: line. You could hardcode a To into the appropriate Template in that case. -kevin pgptdLy2hnDDV.pgp Description: PGP signature RT Training in Washington DC, USA on Oct 25 26 2010 Last one this year -- Learn how to get the most out of RT!
Re: [rt-users] replacing/eliminating undisclosed recipients
--- On Tue, 9/21/10, Kevin Falcone falc...@bestpractical.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:04:28PM -0700, Joseph Spenner wrote: I'm using RT 3.8.8 with postfix 2.3.3, on CentOS 5.4 64bit. Are you sure about the postfix part (See below)? I noticed the sendmail messages in the logs as well (both postfix and sendmail messages), even though postfix is the only one running. So, I just now removed the sendmail packages from the system, and updated the RT_SiteConfig.pm with: Set($UseFriendlyToLine, 1); I no longer see sendmail messages/errors in the log. However, now the To: address (directed to watchers), looks like this: to: AdminCc of rtbox.mydomain.com Ticket #7:; instead of undisclosed recipients. It's different, but still suboptimal. :) Any more help would be great. Thanks! RT Training in Washington DC, USA on Oct 25 26 2010 Last one this year -- Learn how to get the most out of RT!
