I don’t think we need it. The only people that really need to worry about a configuration like that are people that use Mutt/Pine/etc, and generally those people know how to set those particular settings.
-- Joel Esler | Talos: Manager | [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> On Sep 19, 2017, at 6:28 PM, Crystalslave <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: To be honest, I'm not sure if the verbiage should be removed wholesale. I didn't include the return path in last night's original post, and when Mr. Varnell replied this morning, I didn't see the reply in my inbox. I only found it by browsing to the archive and seeing it there. So something was definitely missing. To be clear, I've never bothered with a host-based mail client like Thunderbird or Evolution. Heretofore, I've never needed to. This correspondence has been maintained solely through the standard Gmail web client. That seems to be problematic. In response to Reindl's post, I did some research pertaining to mail headers. Seen below is the header that was automatically generated by the Gmail web client for the post that I made this morning: --- MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.157.48.116 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 10:52:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 12:52:13 -0500 Delivered-To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Message-ID: <cabmdtuazhp8_8mouaj843s1bsn6xq43ycga27oiesujshai...@mail.gmail.com<mailto:cabmdtuazhp8_8mouaj843s1bsn6xq43ycga27oiesujshai...@mail.gmail.com>> Subject: Part 2: Dynamic engine module for scanning media files (e.g., MP3, MP4, etc.)? From: Crystalslave <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-Path: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> --- Note the newline between Content-Type and Return-Path. That demarcates the beginning of the message body. In other words, the return path is only present because I manually added it. This may be the only viable approach for a Gmail user who doesn't want to bother with a host-based web client. Is that perhaps why the verbiage was there in the first place? Note also the absence of a "Sender" field. It seems to have been replaced by "Delivered-To." Could that also have been problematic? For many of you folks, this mailing list stuff probably seems second-nature, but when I woke up this morning, I didn't even know what an envelope sender was. I only learned how to view the full email header by visiting this page: https://support.google.com/mail/answer/22454?hl=en In short, I just think more could be done to make mailing list use a little more straightforward for those of us who have been spoiled by the click-and-post nature of forums. Just my two cents. :) On 9/19/17, Joel Esler (jesler) <[email protected]> wrote: On Sep 19, 2017, at 2:48 PM, Kris Deugau <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Crystalslave wrote: Return-Path: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> First off, my apologies for the confusion. This is my first time posting to a mailing list; I didn't really know how to handle the return path thing, so I had to start over. Is this better? The return path goes at the top of the message body, right? Or is it the subject line? The verbiage on the ML FAQ is a little ambiguous. http://www.clamav.net/documents/mailing-lists-faq TBH I had to go have a look to see what you were talking about; in ~20+ years participating in various lists like this I've never met one that had such a strange public-facing requirement for something that's part of the internals of normal mail system operation. "Return-Path" is a generated header most commonly added to a message on final delivery, not something you add in the body or as an outgoing header. The sentence "Please check that your outgoing messages start with a line like the following: Return-Path: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> where [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> is the mail account which you used to subscribe to the mailing-list." should really be removed outright, along with the last sentence "You will be able to post to the mailing-lists by putting any of those addresses in Return-Path.". "Subscribers-only" posting is common on "interactive" mailing lists like this one - technically inclined or not. So long as you're using a regular mail program to send to the list, and you have your user profile set to the address you subscribed with, you should be fine. I agree that it’s unnecessary. I’ve removed the verbiage. _______________________________________________ clamav-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml _______________________________________________ clamav-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml _______________________________________________ clamav-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
