Re: Two copies of E-Mail (Re: I wish to advocate linux)
On 3/10/13, Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri 08 Mar 2013 at 23:19:06 -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
>
>> But I am a pedantic sort and so must say that every message does have
>
> To continue with the pedantry :) and to return to the issue raised in
> this subthread, a CC is not a duplicate of a list mail. Put them side by
..
> Fortunately, Mutt users have the opportunity to take advantage of its
> ability to construct a custom Message-ID: header for a mail sent to
> debian-user. Like so:
>
> send-hook . 'unmy_hdr Message-ID:'
> send-hook 'debian-user@lists\.debian\.org' 'my_hdr Message-ID:<`date
> +"%Y%m%d%H%M%S"`NoCcsPlease@example.com>'
>
> A mail with NoCcsPlease in its In-Reply-To or References headers can
> only have had the mailing list mail as its source. However, the CC will
> not contain a List-ID: header. This makes it possible to distinguish
> between a list mail and a CC. Procmail recipes based on these two
> conditions can now file list mail with certainty and, if desired, delete
> CCs.
Cool :)
Thanks for sharing. Appreciated.
> How this could be implemented in other MUAs depends on the capability of
> the mailer. It works nicely with Mutt because of the behind-the-scenes
> send-hook facility. Icedove and KMail can alter the portion of the
> Message-ID: header after the @, but whether this could be made automatic
> in the same way as Mutt I do not know. Header rewriting by an MTA may
> also be a possibility, but I know nothing about that either.
>
> It is reported that some mailers do not produce In-Reply-To: and
> References: headers when replying to a mail. Well, you can't win 'em all.
Would it be possible to also pipe outgoing mail through procmail or
similar, on its way to the MTA/SMTP server?
cheers
zenaan
Reply to: