I think that's a great idea! However, my suggestion would be to use
submit to your advantage here. The "submit" protocol is well documented
somewhere (I read it for over an hour the other night) and while a
little unwieldy IMO it also seems like the best way to do injection.
I come from a qmail background, and it seems to me that 'submit' takes
the place of qmail-inject and qmail-queue. It also seems like there
might be some benefit to writing a qmail-inject-like wrapper for submit.
I like that idea... wonder how hard it would be.
One side note though - a word of warning. SpamAssassin looks at received
headers and ALREADY fails to properly recognize courier's format - as a
result mail received locally from an authenticated user is not detected as
such and may be penalized for coming from a black hole listed IP....
I've submitted a bug report and been told that it MAY be fixed by version
2.70 - doing this could likely derail this header test again, so if you use
SA you may have to code to skip it for locally authenticated users (which is
probably an efficient idea anyways...)
Looking forward to the benchmarks - and also secretly wanting to try
modifying a message file to see what happens. Maybe we misunderstood Sam -
it is possible a modification could be ok as long as it doesn't corrupt the
mime envelope?? Just a thought...
m/
25 messages in net.sourceforge.lists.courier-usersRE: [courier-users] Re: My Modest Pro...
.patch
