Re: exim4 vs. frontier.com
On Sun 13 Nov 2022 at 13:25:05 (-0000), Curt wrote:
> On 2022-11-13, David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Sat 12 Nov 2022 at 13:41:35 (-0000), Curt wrote:
> >> On 2022-11-12, David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > If and when that works, it should be simple to get exim to send
> >> > to the smarthost in the same manner. It should involve only the
> >> > two files /etc/exim4/{passwd.client,update-exim4.conf.conf} in
> >> > most cases.
> >>
> >> https://groups.google.com/g/linux.debian.user/c/bAI10SqfmGA
> >>
> >> He asked the same question back in May but with some other data
> >> points, not that it probably makes any difference.
> >
> > Yes, I referred to that, without citing it. However, the data points
> > were related to exim, and also lacked much context.
> >
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2022/05/msg00193.html
> >
> > It's quite possible that the OP has messed up exim's configuration
> > by tinkering with it, so I think it's simpler (and may give confidence
> > that frontier.com is not particularly unusual) by sending something
> > via mutt alone. Then the data used by mutt can be translated into
> > the equivalents for exim.
> >
> > BTW this goes back somewhat further—does this ring a bell?
> >
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/07/msg00115.html
>
> No, but the following thread I do remember vaguely:
>
> https://linux.debian.user.narkive.com/3PRw93ts/email-lacks-sender-address
Or, as I would know it,
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2022/04/msg00714.html
(You do get your debian-user posts from a variety of sources!)
Yes, that thread's a good example of how you can go round the houses
configuring exim. I suspect the purported solution might not even
have been the actual fix, as the OP had probably made a number of
other changes along the way, that we were not party to.
AFAIK the most verbose exim logs are still just a set of abbreviated
codes rather than a dialog, whereas mutt's debug 5 output gives the
entire SMTP dialog from start to finish, so about the only thing
missing is the TLS negotiation, for which I assume openssl would be
a better tool to investigate with.
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: