Re: [Nmh-workers] Dealing with missing From: header during send.

[Harald Geyer]

> >I propose quite the opposite: Why not install sane components
> >files on installation but still allow users to rely on header
> >rewritting if they like to?
> 
> Okay, here's my question to you: the draft file has a completely nonexistent
> From: line.  What do we use as the From line in the message, and what
> do we use as the MAIL FROM: message as part of the SMTP transaction?

Well, if we can't come up with anything better, then just whatever we
use now.

Some details:

I write this message without a From line, but
it will be filed in my outbox with a line of
From:    Harald Geyer <address@hidden>

I think this is okay.

IIRC to get this I had to add a line to /etc/nmh/mts.conf:
localname: a.g4.wien.funkfeuer.at

Before I knew about mts.conf I got this filed in my outbox:
From:    Harald Geyer <address@hidden>

While this might not be ideal, it worked for several years and nobody
ever complained about bad From: headers. People did complain to me
about subtle errors in mime headers, so clearly I'm sending mail to
people, who care about proper message construction.

It seems that Lyndon is arguing that it would be better to just have
From:   lambda
to prompt the MTA to rewrite the header. I just tried to send a message
like that and it worked, but nmh added a 
Sender: address@hidden
line, which it doesn't do in the other cases. So likely this is not
equivalent to REALLYDUMB?

Personally I like the
From:    Harald Geyer <address@hidden>
version most and I think it would be ok to force people to properly
configure their localname, but I guess that this question really isn't
important as people, who make use of header rewriting, do so no matter
what the exact form of the From line.

Following the principle of least surprise I'd just go with whatever
was the default in the past. Anybody who wants system wide components
plus header rewriting will need to know what he is doing anyway.

Harald