On Wed, 8 Nov 2000 19:31:06 -0700 Greg Noel <GregNoel@...> wrote:
> At 7:23 PM +0000 11/8/00, Karsten Ball¸der wrote:
> >KBTEST shows an endless recursion here which I'm trying to
> >trace. Please give it a try anyway...
> This can happen in a jumbled build if you tell make about an object as
> occuring both in the source and the object directory and there's a
> dependency between them (possibly indirect). It doesn't happen in a
> separate build tree.
Misunderstanding, not make recurses, but some mailfolder
code. I think I fixed it though.
> >I also found that my ISP doesn't send message which have a different
> >From: address, i.e. I cannot pretend to be someone else.
> If you're on a UNIX workalike, send the message via sendmail (which is now
> working fine, BTW; thanks for that). If you're sending from one ISP and
> referring to another, why? Finally, if the Sender is a valid address for
> your ISP and they reject it, report the bug.
Not possible. One ISP doesn't like sendmail as it requires
authentication, the other does not accept mails with From:
not originating from their side.
> >Reply-To: should not be used to pretend to be someone else,
> >but would be the right if I want to say "I am xxxx, but
> >please reply to this mailing list instead" in which case I
> >would set Reply-To to point to the list.
> Ur, close enough. It's intended for the case where a boss sends a message
> to Joe, Jim, and Bob and tells them to do something. The boss sets the
> Reply-To to "Joe, Jim, Bob" since the next communication he wants is that
> the work has been completed and he doesn't care how Joe, Jim, and Bob
> divide it up.
> So using it to redirect replies to a mailing list is either a mild abuse or
> a neat hack, depending on your perspective.
> >From: whatever I want to appear as the author
> Yes. "This field contains the identity of the person(s) who wished
> this message to be sent. The message-creation process should
> default this field to be a single, authenticated machine
> address, indicating the AGENT (person, system or process)
> entering the message. If this is not done, the "Sender" field
> MUST be present. If the "From" field IS defaulted this way,
> the "Sender" field is optional and is redundant with the
> "From" field. In all cases, addresses in the "From" field
> must be machine-usable (addr-specs) and may not contain named
> lists (groups)."
> >Sender: the real mail address from where the message is
> >sent, a valid return address in case of trouble
> Yes. "This field contains the authenticated identity of the AGENT
> (person, system or process) that sends the message. It is
> intended for use when the sender is not the author of the mes-
> sage, or to indicate who among a group of authors actually
> sent the message. If the contents of the "Sender" field would
> be completely redundant with the "From" field, then the
> "Sender" field need not be present and its use is discouraged
> (though still legal). In particular, the "Sender" field MUST
> be present if it is NOT the same as the "From" Field.
> >So usually Sender & From would be identical, unless I am
> >sending for someone else.
> Yes, if you include "a different address for me" in "someone else".
> >Then we would need to distinguish three situations:
> Actually four: two orthogonal cases.
> >1. normal operation
> > From==Sender, Reply-To empty
> Yes, although both Sender and Reply-To should be empty.
> >2. normal operation, redirected replies
> > From==Sender, Reply-To to somewhere else
> Again, Sender should be empty.
> >3. sending for someone else
> > From != Sender, Sender my real ISP address where I am,
> > From for whom I'm sending
> > (optional Reply-To)
> Yes, although this is two situations.
> >Or did I misunderstand it all?
> I think it's easier this way:
> 1. From==Sender, sender not present
> 2. From!=Sender, sender present
> 1. Redirect replies, Reply-To to somewhere else
> 2. Otherwise, Reply-To not present
> Hope this helps,
It definitely does. As soon as KBTEST works as expected I'll
make sure that Mahogany handles this correctly.
My ISP problem is that I set "From:" to "M-Developers
<mahogany-....>" which is not the right domain, so I should
leave "Sender:" to be "balluder@..." and the ISP should
accept me. The way mahoggay currently behaves is by fully
pretending to be someone else, just like a junk mailer. IMHO
a very useful feature, but shouldn't be default.