Re: [Exim] Unexpectedly odd interaction of Exim & Fetchmail

dman wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 24, 2001 at 05:05:28PM -0500, Derek Broughton wrote:
> |
> | From fetchmail@??? Mon Dec 24 10:34:53 2001
> | Envelope-to: derek@othello
> | Received: from fetchmail by casio.othello.dyn.ca with local (Exim
3.32
> | #1 (Debian))
> | id 16IX7r-0002WK-00
> | for <derek@othello>; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 10:34:51 -0500
> |
> |
> | "fetchmail " is the correct userid of the fetchmail process on my
> | system (though it's not running on netcom.ca, that's
understandable),
> | but why is it suddenly using that as the sender, not the real
sender?
>
> It looks like fetchmail has popen()ed exim and is piping the message
> to it.
>
> Do you have an "mda=" specification in your .fetchmailrc?

No, and that's why it seemed strange, because that's what it looked
like
to me. I haven't changed fetchmail, but I had changed exim. Changing
back what I thought I'd done (yeah, when will I ever learn to keep
backups :-( ), successfully made things work. I'd tried out one of
the
spam filtering suggestions from last week:

#bounce_spam_master:
# driver = smartuser
# require_files = /etc/exim/bouncelist
# senders = /etc/exim/bouncelist
# new_address = :fail: "unknown local-part \"$local_part\" in domain
\"$domain\""

and (silly me - two changes at once) my own attempt at delivering mail
to folders within a Maildir:

#localfolder:
# driver = localuser
# transport = folder_delivery
# require_files = "/home/$local_part/Maildir/${if match
{$header_subject:}{\\[(\\w+)\\]} {.$1/} {XXtest} }"

I'll track down which of those two was the problem, next (even though
the bounce business was done without really understanding if it could
work in a fetchmail situation, I'm betting it was my own code from the
second attempt, which I already knew wasn't doing what I wanted...).

Thanks,
derek