Hello,
I am using the appendfile transport to generate batched SMTP for an uucp
uplink. It works quite fine, but if I try change the return path (envelope
sender) using the 'return_path' statement within the transport
specification, this only affects the "Return-Path:" header if
'return_path_add' is set to true. The real envelope sender ("MAIL FROM")
is never changed.
I'm not sure, but I think this is not the way the 'return_path' statement
should work.
Here is an excerpt of a short test configuration to reproduce this
behaviour:
bsmtp_for_uucp_director:
driver = appendfile
mode = 600
bsmtp = all
bsmtp_helo
prefix =
suffix =
# Use a really reachable return path
return_path = thomas@???
# Just for debugging
return_path_add
The corresponding director does a pretty simple setup:
uucp_director:
driver = smartuser
domains = *
new_address = /var/spool/mail/uplink/uucp_batch
user = uucp
group = uucp
file_transport = bsmtp_for_uucp_director
I run Exim 3.22 #5.
The computer which exim is running on is named "my.local", and the domain
"t-online.de" is in 'local_domains'.
This is a sample message header which is output by this configuration
when sending a locally generated mail from thomas@??? to
thomas@???:
-------
HELO my.local
MAIL FROM:<thomas@???>
RCPT TO:<thomas@???>
DATA
Return-path: <thomas@???>
Received: from my.local ([10.0.0.5.16388])
by my.local with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #5)
id 15Gm5b-0000dZ-00
for thomas@???; Sun, 01 Jul 2001 20:36:59 +0200
Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2001 20:36:59 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Voss <thomas@???>
To: Thomas Voss <thomas@???>
Subject: Test
Message-ID: <4325234234@???>
-------
Can anyone point out what is going wrong here?
Greetings,
Thomas
