Philip Hazel <ph10@???> probably said:
> Odd. *All* replies sent by autoreply are supposed to have an envelope
> sender of <>. There is no mechanism in the code for setting anything else.
Thats what I thought.
> Even odder. I copied your director and transport exactly and when I sent
> a message to "unknown@localhost", I got back
> >From MAILER-DAEMON Thu Jul 23 09:39:01 1998
> Return-path: <>
Hrrrrrm.
> and no Sender header. This was all done on one machine with a local delivery.
As is this.
> I guess the way to find out what it is doing on your system is to run
> and see what the debugging output tells us.
set_process_info: 12250 2.01 delivering 0yzP9i-0003BY-00 to unknown
using dounknown
dounknown transport entered
taking data from transport
writing data block size=279 timeout=0
Exim version 2.01 debug level set to 9
[...]
set_process_info: 12251 2.01 accepting a local non-SMTP message from
<nobody@???>
Accepting from nobody ?
Sender: nobody@???
[snip]
"nobody@???" rewritten as "nobody@???"
I don't get it :/
> > I also want to get rid of the In-Reply-To: header, which I don't seem
> > able to do.
> There isn't any way to do this. The autoreply transport always creates
> one for the message it sends. In fact, the headers add and remove stuff,
> if set for autoreply, apply to the copy of the original message that it
> includes.
Oh well, that one doesn't matter as much.
P.
--
pir pir@??? pir@??? pir@???
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
