MUSH 7.1.2 and SMAIL 3.1.19

Article View: comp.mail.mush

Article #493

#493

From: David Summers
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 1990 06:50

20 lines
1402 bytes

I'm not sure if this has already been discussed before but I just found out
that SMAIL 3.1.19 works slightly different from SENDMAIL 5.61 in the way that
it handles transport-level addresses.  SENDMAIL will accept addresses with 
commas in them in the command line, while SMAIL 3.1.19 will not.  This caused
my SMAIL mailer to fail on the first of a multiple-address mail message, until
I re-configured and re-compiled MUSH with the NO_COMMAS macro defined.

Just thought I'd let people know in case someone was having problems with this.
Sorry to waste bandwidth if this has already been discussed before.  

ELM 2.3 PL6 seems to already work correctly, so I didn't have to re-compile it.

Other than that, I've had NO problems with SMAIL!  I'm impressed!

   - David Summers

-- 
I'm sick and tired of this machine, I wish that I could sell it.
It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it!
- David Summers (david@actsn.fay.ar.us)

Technical Details

Message-ID: <564@actsn.fay.ar.us>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!uafhp!actsn!david

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!uafhp!actsn!david
From: david@actsn.fay.ar.us (David Summers)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.mush,comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: MUSH 7.1.2 and SMAIL 3.1.19
Keywords: Has this already been discussed?
Message-ID: <564@actsn.fay.ar.us>
Date: 31 Aug 90 06:50:19 GMT
Followup-To: comp.mail.mush
Organization: All Church Technical Service, Fayetteville, AR
Lines: 20