I see from your later message you found the -msgid flag in your .mh_profile, so skipping over that ...
>>> BTW, while I am looking at this, it seems even more bizarre that >>> LocaleName will apply "localdomain" even when it's ignoring "localname". > >> Not at all; if localname is unqualified, then it makes perfect sense >> to append localdomain. > >But does the same apply to the result of getaddrinfo? Hard to tell. Hrm. I guess I hadn't completely thought about the implications of how localdomain was implemented; I didn't really think about the issue of LocalName(0) versus LocalName(1). But your point is well taken; it doesn't really make sense to apply localdomain to both, does it? I think that if you're using localname you would be expected to supply a FQDN, and localdomain should only apply in the LocalName(1) case. My gut feeling is that localdomain is so rarely used nowadays that it's not worth fixing it for 1.5. Thoughts from anyone else? For post-1.5 I'd be fine with either using localdomain for only the LocalName(1) case or junking support for it completely. Or perhaps doing something else altogether. Thoughts? --Ken _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
