Re: Fetchmail changes?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 11 November 2001 12:32 am, Shaul Karl wrote:
> >Before that I wrote
...
> > Using kmail, if I get some spam mail, I hit control B which is supposed
> > to send a bounce message back to the sender. This pops up a warning
> > dialog with the mail address of who it is going to send the bounce
> > message to.
Maybe its kmail that has changed!
> >
> > All of a sudden last week I noticed that hitting control B was no longer
> > giving mail address of where the message had originally come from, but
> > was instead reporting that it would try and bounce the message to
> > fetchmail@chandlerfamily.org.uk. Looking at the headers of the message I
> > am trying to about does indeed have
> >
> > Return-path: <fetchmail@chandlerfamily.org.uk>
I've checked out exim and it does this (and as far as I can see is supposed
to)
> >
> > My question - when did this change take place - is it an update to debian
> > /etc/init.d/fetchmail - which seems to now set the user id to "fetchmail"
> > before running the daemon (did it do this before?) or fetchmail itself?
Again I have had double read of the man page which seems to say this is
correct - if its run as user fetchmail it uses itself as sender.
>
> The Return-path on my system looks O.K.
> Does the fetchmail@chandlerfamily.org.uk Return-path appears on non
> spam messages too?
I haven't properly got to the bottom of this yet. Exim docs says that the
RFC says the last link in the chain should add a return path message although
it is unclear as to what this does. My check of the exim.conf file is that
when its doing a local delivery thats what it does.
It seems that kmail is using it as the address for bounce messages now (but
not before?).
> As far as I can tell, fetchmail works according to /etc/fetchmailrc and
> /etc/default/fetchmail. Could it be that those config files tell
> fetchmail to rewrite the mail headers? Maybe the MDA is somehow
> involved in this headers rewrite?
Fetchmail does write some headers but not the return path - although it
refers to RCPT TO header- is this the same?
- --
Alan - alan@chandlerfamily.org.uk
http://www.chandlerfamily.org.uk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE77dl81mf3M5ZDr2kRAhA2AJ4nc6HzDk5yAd1/XLRcfl8PALd52wCfdveQ
hQSlsjfmqHh1G5uqpnvLGKo=
=kPMI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: