Paul J Stevens wrote:
can be considered mailinglist safe, and the extensive headercheck in the original post is redundant since mailinglist *never* use the recipient address in the to or cc headers. Right?
I never thought of that, some of the checks are superfluous indeed. But vacation should not only be mailinglist safe, there are other mails you wouldn't want to answer. There are the mailer-daemon mails, some custom mass mails, maybe more some autogenerated replies?
Btw, if somebody sends a BCC, then he won't get my reply anyway when I use addresses:. Shouldn't he get the vacation message?
So what if I don't use addresses: in vacation and use all the header checks instead. That would handle the bcc's correctly, right?
Alex
