From: Christopher D. Audley (no email)
Date: Sun Dec 02 2001 - 23:25:41 EST
deliver is correct in reporting the error. The 'From pilsl....' line
with no colon after the From is how the beginning of a new message is
marked in an mbox file. It is not a correct rfc822 header, and as the
first line in the message, it is not a valid rfc822 message.
Peter Pilsl wrote:
>this is an old problem I run into several times and found also plenty
>of postings at googles, but this time I really want to know, who the
>evil is ;)
>
>If I get a mail and pass it through procmail/formail to add an x-loop-header
>and then pass to deliver, deliver fails with an error: "Message
>contains invalid header"
>
>The reason is that formail (and not procmail !) - that always tries to
>fix the mail to be standardconform - adds one From-line at the
>beginning of the mail in a format deliver doesnt seem to like:
>
>example: cat /tmp/mail | formail -a"X-Loop3: "server.goldfisch.at"
>
>the input:
>Return-Path: <>
>Received: from server2.local (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])\\
> by server2.local (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id fATL5vOx015215
>...
>
>becomes to:
>
>From Mon Dec 3 01:29:04 2001
>Return-Path: <>
>Received: from server2.local (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])\\
> by server2.local (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id fATL5vOx015215
>...
>
>
>While this is no current problem, cause I can use the -f switch of
>formail to prevent it from doing so or use the tail-command to remove
>this line again, I am worried about it, cause maybe one day a mail
>will pass by with the same format formails wants to make and deliver
>will fail ...
>
>who is wrong in this case ? formail or deliver ?
>
>thnx,
>peter
>
>ps: the proper solution at the moment will be to let formail add this
>suspicious first line in any case and remove it with tail later. While
>this is some unwanted overhead one should be on the save side doing so
>
|
|
|