mp@allegra.UUCP (Mark Plotnick) (07/01/88)
We'd like to add an option to Mail so that it will use the From_ line rather than the frequently incorrect From: line when users reply to messages (as more and more intermediate uucp sites adopt the convention that they not modify the From: line, more and more users here have been requesting that we "fix the broken 'r' command". Changing Mail seems to be the easiest and most reliable alternative. We do some path short-circuiting in sendmail, so using the path in the From_ line ought not to send a mail message too far astray. In fact, no farther astray than the message that it's in reply to). This is on 4.3BSD and SunOS 3.x/4.0 systems. The changes look easy enough to make (add a check for a new variable, say, "replyfrom_", and modify the *resp* and name1 routines), but I've learned never to underestimate the side effects in the Mail source code. Has anyone else done this? Mark Plotnick allegra!mp
honey@umix.UUCP (07/01/88)
Mail 2.17 was the last bsd mailer that used "From " and i've stuck with it. pub/honey/motf.Z on citi.umich.edu is what it has become. (it uses 'r' for "From " replies, 'R' for From: replies. the often abused reply-to-a-lot-of-people-by-accident is "rr" or "RR".) peter
dheller@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Dan Heller) (07/01/88)
In article <10682@andante.UUCP> mp@allegra.UUCP (Mark Plotnick) writes: >We'd like to add an option to Mail so that it will use the From_ line >rather than the frequently incorrect From: line when users reply to Well, using mush, you can just set the reply_to_hdr variable to be anything from NULL, to a list of headers ... Mush will look for each header till one is found and use that. For example, I set mine to Reply-To, Return-Path, From. This is usually the best list to choose from. Now, I know what you're thinking... "No! not another mailer!" You don't want to learn yet another mail interface and lose all those great things you were used to with Mail... well, you won't. Mush was designed to be as backwards compatible to ucb-Mail as possible -- in fact, the distribution comes with a Mailrc which sets variables and things so that mush will look exactly like ucbmail. This includes virtually all commands and functionality. (there are some exceptions, but you probably won't care anymore before you ever find those exceptions). Neat features include: Automatic incorporation of new mail as it comes in. Sort messages according to <lots of options> Pick messages (analogous to MH) History (like csh) Command-line aliases (like csh) Piping commands Running Unix commands (this is a shell, remember) A curses interface (if you're clever, you can make it look like rn :-) Programmability (make it look like vi or emacs or whatever) A suntools interface (sun 2.0 and up). On-line help for each command and it's legal arguments. Now, you're asking, "will mush work on *my* system?" Probably. Mush has been successfully installed on many systems from risc machines, to PC's.. If it runs unix, you can probably run mush. If it doesn't, let me know what's wrong and I'll fix it (or try to). Where do you get it? The latest version is on ucbvax in mush-6.3.tar.Z If you have a system V box and have tried mush before with some errors, all the documented system V bugs have been solved. It even passes lint with less than a page of errors (depending on your lint, I guess). Your milage may vary, but it's worth a shot. If you don't have ftp access, you can mail me here (dheller@cory.berkeley.edu) and I'll mail you a copy (tarmail format). Dan Heller <island!argv@sun.com>
diamant@hpfclp.SDE.HP.COM (John Diamant) (07/03/88)
> For example, I set mine to Reply-To, Return-Path, From. This is usually > the best list to choose from. I'm surprised you haven't been burned by this. Return-Path is not a valid header to use for replies. In many cases, it holds the path only back to the last system, not the originator. If you check your RFCs, it isn't intended as an originator mail path. John Diamant Software Development Environments Hewlett-Packard Co. ARPA Internet: diamant@hpfclp.sde.hp.com Fort Collins, CO UUCP: {hplabs,hpfcla}!hpfclp!diamant
dheller@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Dan Heller) (07/05/88)
In article <8120014@hpfclp.SDE.HP.COM> diamant@hpfclp.SDE.HP.COM (John Diamant) writes: >> For example, I set mine to Reply-To, Return-Path, From. This is usually >> the best list to choose from. >I'm surprised you haven't been burned by this. Return-Path is not a valid >header to use for replies. In many cases, it holds the path only back to the >last system, not the originator. If you check your RFCs, it isn't intended >as an originator mail path. But in many cases it is a legitimate path. Of course, I check the path anyway to see if it is correct. In the cases where it isn't, I just kill the reply and reply again with different values in my reply_to_hdr variable. Because Mush has command line aliases, I condense all the required commands to simple keystrokes ... mush> cmd R 'set reply_to_hdr = reply-to ; replyall' mush> cmd r 'unset reply_to_hdr ; replysender' etc... "cmd" is the way to set a command line alias ("alias" is reserved for compatibility with Mail). Now, all I have to do is use R, r, or one of my other aliases. Because not all mailers guarantee that the correct address will be in the same header, I can't use the same set of headers to get the reply path. Besides, the whole point to my posting was that mush makes it _configurable_ about which header you want to use. Dan Heller <island!argv@sun.com>
lee@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Greg Lee) (07/05/88)
From article <4250@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu>, by dheller@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Dan Heller): " Besides, the whole point to my posting was that mush makes it _configurable_ " about which header you want to use. vn gives you menu choices for which address to use. I think that's even nicer. Greg, lee@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu