[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New bug tracker server
From: |
Stephen J. Turnbull |
Subject: |
Re: New bug tracker server |
Date: |
Thu, 26 Nov 2009 02:41:08 +0900 |
Chong Yidong writes:
> > Indeed, in that case the destination info in the "Received" header is
> > probably missing.
> When you send to address@hidden and BCC address@hidden, the headers
> get stripped out:
> Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67)
> (envelope-from <address@hidden>)
> id 1ND1u3-0004qm-49; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:22:23 -0500
Probably what is happening is that the message is being forwarded from
the fencepost MTA to *both* @debbugs addresses in *one* SMTP
transaction. Since there's a BCC, you don't want "for <the BCC'd
address>" in the headers that find their way to the other addressees.
Another possibility is that in a multiple addressee transaction, the
MTA doesn't put a list in "for", it ignores it.
- Re: New bug tracker server, (continued)
Re: New bug tracker server, Glenn Morris, 2009/11/20
Re: New bug tracker server, Glenn Morris, 2009/11/24
- Re: New bug tracker server, Stefan Monnier, 2009/11/24
- Re: New bug tracker server, Chong Yidong, 2009/11/25
- Re: New bug tracker server,
Stephen J. Turnbull <=
- Re: New bug tracker server, Stefan Monnier, 2009/11/25
- Re: New bug tracker server, Chong Yidong, 2009/11/25
- Re: New bug tracker server, Glenn Morris, 2009/11/25
Re: New bug tracker server, Glenn Morris, 2009/11/25