Hi Tom, > Consider this 3 line test message: > > From: [email protected] > > To: (foo) > > Bcc: [email protected]
`To: (foo)' is invalid on the wire IIRC https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322 correctly. > nmh 1.6 however, empties out the To: header. I wonder if there are users with `cc: (optional)' templates as a prompt. :-) > I got the idea of using ( something here ) in the To: header as a way > of refering to a Dcc or Bcc list of addresses from: > > > https://serverfault.com/questions/743538/sendmail-support-of-empty-group-addresses-aka-list-syntax IOW, sendmail's bug is not accepting an empty group address: `foo: ;'. > Would be nice if nmh would preserve the > > To: (foo) > > header. Even if nmh could change to pass this to some local MTA, I don't think it should change to preserve this in something that's meant to be RFC 5322 as it's in violation. Here's a subset of RFC 5322's grammar. Lines are followed down and right. to = "To:" address-list CRLF └─address-list = (address *("," address)) / obs-addr-list └─address = mailbox / group ├─mailbox = name-addr / addr-spec │ ├─name-addr = [display-name] angle-addr │ │ └─angle-addr = [CFWS] "<" addr-spec ">" [CFWS] / obs-angle-addr │ │ ├─obs-angle-addr = [CFWS] "<" obs-route addr-spec ">" [CFWS] │ └───┴─┴─addr-spec = local-part "@" domain └─group = display-name ":" [group-list] ";" [CFWS] So `to' must have a literal "@" from `addr-spec' or a literal ":" from `group'. -- Cheers, Ralph. https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy -- Nmh-workers https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
