On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, mike ledoux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 05:50:01PM -0800, Karl J. Runge wrote: > > True, but couldn't the user construct a procmail line that would force > > the issue for the user's mailer? > > > > :0 Hfw > > * ^[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > | formail -I "From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > > > This may not by right, but the idea is the "f" in Hfw means filter > > the mail thru the pipe and have it continue on... > > Ugh. Please don't. Aside from making it very difficult for anyone using > that to reply only to the original sender, that will break attribuitions > completely, making this much more painful for the rest of us.
Whoops!, too tired last night. I believe I meant "Reply-To:" not "From:" | formail -i "Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (btw, Mike suggests the use of -i to force formail to retain any original header in Old-Reply-To:). The basic idea here is that if a user does not like gnhlug's Reply-To policy, they can change it this way if they want to. If they find that makes their life harder they can stop using it! Also, if their mailer respects some special headers, say X-Mutt-Reply-To, they could play around with that. One can see formail(1) for more info. ***************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *****************************************************************
