[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: mutt, gnome terminal, xemacs, gnuserv, debian etch

Chris Bannister <mockingbird@ihug.co.nz>:
>  On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 07:15:54PM +0000, s. keeling wrote:
> > Chris Bannister <mockingbird@ihug.co.nz>:
> > >  On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 02:47:21PM -0600, Russell L. Harris wrote:
> > > > The package chain is as follows:
> > > > 
> > > > INCOMING MAIL:  pop3 server @ my ISP -->  getmail4  -->  maildrop  -->  
> > > > [maildir]  --> mutt
> > 
> > pop3@ISP --> fetchmail --> procmail --> mutt
>  So fetchmail doesn't send it through exim4?

Actually, it does, but it doesn't have to:

>  from man fetchmail ...
>  [..]
>      If no port 25 listener is available, but your  fetchmail
>      configuration was  told  about  a  reliable local MDA, it will use
>      that MDA for local delivery instead.

So, if .fetchmailrc contains a line saying your MDA is procmail,
fetchmail hands it to procmail.  No MTA needed.

>  An MTA is priority standard.

Yes, but not mandatory.

> > A working Exim config can be very picky about a couple of lower level
> > options, such as re-writing headers and hiding header re-writing.
> > With those set wrong, mail will look alright until you send to a
> > system that's more suspicious, and your mail will go silently into the
>  I think I see what you are saying. Is there a command to check the
>  config?

None that I know of.  My tests include sending mail to a couple of
seriously picky servers.  If it gets through them, the config is

>  Is the checking not good enough? So the system that's more
>  suspicious would not be exim?

The system that's more suspicious is simply more stringent about what
it considers valid mail.  Ie., IP address lookups before acceptance &
etc.  I've no idea what MTA they use, nor do I much care.  For me,
it's enough that that black box out there is authoritative.

Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)    http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling          Linux Counter #80292
- -    http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html    Please, don't Cc: me.
       Spammers! http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling/emails.html

Reply to: