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
correct.
> 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:
- References:
- Re: mutt, gnome terminal, xemacs, gnuserv, debian etch
- From: Andrew Sackville-West <andrew@farwestbilliards.com>
- Re: mutt, gnome terminal, xemacs, gnuserv, debian etch
- From: "Russell L. Harris" <rlharris@oplink.net>
- Re: mutt, gnome terminal, xemacs, gnuserv, debian etch
- From: Chris Bannister <mockingbird@ihug.co.nz>
- Re: mutt, gnome terminal, xemacs, gnuserv, debian etch
- From: "s. keeling" <keeling@spots.ab.ca>
- Re: mutt, gnome terminal, xemacs, gnuserv, debian etch
- From: Chris Bannister <mockingbird@ihug.co.nz>