[Mailman-Users] Problems sending to list

[Mark Sapiro]

Patrick Bogen wrote:

>I don't /think/ it's bounce notices. The sendmail logs don't seem to
>reflect that.
>Rather, I think this has to do with the fact that when the messages
>are sent out, the 'To:' header still contains
>announce at physics.tamu.edu even though it reports a different RCPT TO
>in smtp?
>I've set procmail to carbon copy anything that passes through (mailman
>has its own procmail file on my config), and this seems to be what is
>happening.
>So, everything is right in:
>(1) I send mail to announce
>(2) Message hits sendmail
>(3) matches aliases
>(4) Goes to procmail
>(5) Procmail matches on To: ...
>(6) Sends to mailman
>(7) Mailman sends to members
>(8) Any members that aren't mailman lists are delivered
>(9) Mailman lists, however, restart at step (2), but To: still looks
>like announce at physics.tamu.edu, so they are discarded at step #7.


I agree with your analysis.


>The key problem is that procmail can only see the message and its
>headers, which don't seem to give an indication at this stage that the
>message was sent to anything other than announce.. Sendmail knows,
>because it's dispatching them to the proper alias.


*Your* procmail only sees headers and body. Consider in .procmailrc


EnvelopeTo = $1

:0
* EnvelopeTo ?? ^mailman$
|sudo -u mailman /var/mailman/mail/mailman post mailman
:E
* EnvelopeTo ?? ^mailman-admin$
|sudo -u mailman /var/mailman/mail/mailman admin mailman
 etc.
and similarly for the other lists.

Then in sendmail.mc, you invove procmail with a -a argument equal to
the envelope recipient (-a $h I think but don't hold me to it).


>There are a couple of possible patches to this (mucking with
>environment variables at the same time I send to procmail, using a
>seperate procmail config file for each list) but none of these are
>ideal.


Don't need to do that. Just pass the envelope recipient to procmail as
above.


>Am I seeing the correct behaviour from procmail, that the To: is
>maintained as the list address? Is it a privacy issue that the
>addresses are kept out of the headers? Is there an easy way to change
>this behaviour, or are there concerns with it that I'm not seeing?


You can set full personalization for the list (if
OWNERS_CAN_ENABLE_PERSONALIZATION = Yes in mm_cfg.py) which will send
a separate message to each recipient with that recipient address in
To:, but you don't need to do that (am I repeating myself).

-- 
Mark Sapiro <msapiro at value.net>       The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan