At Fri, 14 Feb 2003 00:33:54 -0500, Mark Horn wrote:
>
> It sounds like tmda-filter, when used with qmail, can't modify the
> contents of the incoming email at all.
When the qmail user doesn't set DELIVERY, tmda-filter simply does an
exit(0) to "deliver" the message, which means it progresses to the
next line in the .qmail. In this case we just read the message from
stdin and modified it in memory, but didn't write it anywhere, which
is why no changes we make are retained.
> I need the header in order for this to work. The next step is to
> add a "-p|--procmail" option to tmda-filter which would simply take
> msgin and send it to stdout.
Yup. I think Tim is interested in this as well. Maybe a more generic
name than `procmail' though, unless this is truly specific to
procmail.
> If I correctly understand the comments in Defaults.py this is going
> to be of no usefulness to qmail users.
qmail users can get the same behavior you see by setting DELIVERY.
Most don't due to historical precedence, but they could if they wanted
this feature.
> It looks like tmda already acts like a very well behaved qmail
> filter/plugin/??.
TMDA doesn't cater to qmail, it's just that qmail has a much more
advanced and powerful way for users to control delivery of their mail
than .forward. I'm trying to get WV to add a ``dot-postfix'' interface
but haven't been entirely successful thus far.
> Would it be better if I got the whole thing working and then
> resbumit the patch? Or is this functionality that you don't want to
> include in TMDA?
I think this functionality is fine. I'll commit your patch this
weekend.
BTW, I haven't thought about it very hard, but why these lines?
+ if not globals().get('auto_reply'):
+ action_msg = '%s (no reply)' % action_msg
_________________________________________________
tmda-workers mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers
