You, Philip Hazel write:
>
> Hmm. There shouldn't be more than one From there. How did this get into
> your inbox? Was it via some kind of external delivery agent? I've seen
> this before when someone was using procmail and hadn't configured it to
> trust Exim, so it was adding its own From line on top of what Exim
> provided.
Well, I don't know why it wouldn't be trusting exim, as I have exim
configured to deliver as root to procmail. Here's the recipe I use for
procmail. Procmail definately is compiled to trust user root, and I
just recompiled it to trust exim as well.
procmail_pipe:
driver = pipe;
command = "/usr/bin/procmail -d ${local_part}",
from_hack,
user = root
However, I see from a debugging run that exim is actually changing to
nobody on local delivery. This also happens when I change the above line
to user = exim, as the example in the spec shows. Here's the relevant
section of a debug 9.
>>> Local deliveries >>>
delivering jhenders@??? as jhenders using procmail_pipe:
uid=65534 gid=65534 home=/home/jhenders
Local delivery process 2559 uid=65534 gid=65534
set_process_info: 2559 0.53 delivering 0uZJui-0000fE-00 to jhenders
using procmail_pipe
I checked the Makefile in Local in my src tree, and the EXIM_UID and GID
lines are commented out, which means exim is running with the default
behaviour. I checked my backup copies of exim 0.52 and 0.51 and they
exhibit the same behaviour.
This only appears to happen with the procmail_pipe router. As part of my
virtual mail setup I have names in the virtual aliases file that expand
to filenames, so mail for a user at a virtual domain can be spooled in a
seperate mail spool directory for usernames that don't actually exist on
the system . I have the directory rule for this delivery set to user =
mail and it works fine. The only difference I can see here is that that
rule is a director and the procmail rule is a transport. However, I
can't put user in the procmail directory rule no matter which side of
the ";" it's put on, exim won't accept it in this rule.
>
> There's another oddity. Unless you have configured it out, Exim should
> also add a delivery-date header.
>
I haven't knowingly configured it out. According to the spec, I'd need
to have delivery-date add in the procmail recipe for this to be added.
--
Artificial Intelligence stands no chance against Natural Stupidity.
GAT d- -p+(--) c++++ l++ u++ t- m--- W--- !v
b+++ e* s-/+ n-(?) h++ f+g+ w+++ y*
