On 2012-10-12 at 09:11 -0700, Todd Lyons wrote:
> This is processed and detected starting at line 5018 in src/deliver.c.
> It is the original code since Philip Hazel imported it, so I don't
> think it's the problem. It detects it properly. The '>' is a flag of
> sorts, it indicates to the upcoming code that it is a local delivery
> and not a file or pipe.
It looks as though we have a false comment in filter.c then:
2260 /* Create the "address" for the autoreply. This is used only for
logging,
2261 as the actual recipients are extracted from the To: line by -t. We
use the
2262 same logic here to extract the working addresses (there may be more
than
2263 one). Just in case there are a vast number of addresses, stop when
the
2264 string gets too long. */
2265
[...]
2282 if (recipient != NULL)
2283 {
2284 log_addr = string_cat(log_addr, &size, &ptr,
2285 (log_addr == NULL)? US">" : US",", 1);
2286 log_addr = string_cat(log_addr, &size, &ptr, recipient,
2287 Ustrlen(recipient));
2288 }
This code was added in c25242d781667319938db77399e2073ba9e798f8;
ChangeLog entry was for release 4.60:
----------------------------8< cut here >8------------------------------
PH/05 When a filter generated an autoreply, the entire To: header line was
quoted in the delivery log line, like this:
=> >A.N.Other <[email protected]> <original@ddress> ...
This has been changed so that it extracts the operative address. There
may be more than one such address. If so, they are comma-separated, like
this:
=> >[email protected],[email protected] <original@ddress> ...
----------------------------8< cut here >8------------------------------
Note that part of the commit diff is:
- addr = deliver_make_addr(string_sprintf(">%.256s", to), FALSE);
+ addr = deliver_make_addr(log_addr, FALSE);
So the "addr" was with the > prefix before this too.
> Has nobody ever used this before and noticed that email addresses
> still have this '>' character in front of them? Googling didn't find
> any for me.
I suspect that at some point, the "-t parse" logic must have been
removed/simplified away without realising the address format.
-Phil
--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
