Re: [Dbmail] does dbmail mangle the position of return-path header?

On 03/01/2017 17:33, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 04.12.2016 um 10:54 schrieb Paul J Stevens: On 03-12-16 17:43, Reindl Harald wrote: BTW: it would also be nice when dbmail could stop reformat existing headers - spam reports are horrible to read - they are supposed to have * starting in a new

Re: [Dbmail] does dbmail mangle the position of return-path header?

Am 04.12.2016 um 10:54 schrieb Paul J Stevens: On 03-12-16 17:43, Reindl Harald wrote: BTW: it would also be nice when dbmail could stop reformat existing headers - spam reports are horrible to read - they are supposed to have * starting in a new line with a space before I dunno. This is

Re: [Dbmail] does dbmail mangle the position of return-path header?

Am 04.12.2016 um 10:54 schrieb Paul J Stevens: On 03-12-16 17:43, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 03.12.2016 um 17:37 schrieb Paul J Stevens: Thanks for the reference. You might try attached patch where I fix the generic set_header does this patch apply to 3.1.17? since it's so silent here e

Re: [Dbmail] does dbmail mangle the position of return-path header?

On 03-12-16 17:43, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 03.12.2016 um 17:37 schrieb Paul J Stevens: >> Thanks for the reference. You might try attached patch where I fix the >> generic set_header > > does this patch apply to 3.1.17? since it's so silent here e hestitate > to play around with

Re: [Dbmail] does dbmail mangle the position of return-path header?

Am 03.12.2016 um 17:37 schrieb Paul J Stevens: Thanks for the reference. You might try attached patch where I fix the generic set_header does this patch apply to 3.1.17? since it's so silent here e hestitate to play around with dbmail-3.2 and currently no time anyways since working day and

Re: [Dbmail] does dbmail mangle the position of return-path header?

Thanks for the reference. You might try attached patch where I fix the generic set_header. -- Paul J Stevens pjstevns @ gmail, twitter, github, linkedin >From d213fd84529b3ff3da8b32aa15ef58f2b335383d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00

Re: [Dbmail] does dbmail mangle the position of return-path header?

Am 03.12.2016 um 17:21 schrieb Paul J Stevens: Sounds valid - some RFC that defines this behavior would be nice though in case of dovecot it looks like "Return-Path: " which is always the *first* header and

Re: [Dbmail] does dbmail mangle the position of return-path header?

Harald, Sounds valid - some RFC that defines this behavior would be nice though. Fixing this like you propose is trivial. Currently dbmail uses g_mime_object_set_header(), but instead this could be changed to g_mime_object_prepend_header() We might even get aways with *always* prepend any