Michelle, et al -- ...and then Michelle Konzack said... % % Am 2004-08-12 08:52:35, schrieb Nicolas Rachinsky: % % > after sending the mail, the former can fail. And no, you can't detect % > this before sending the mail, since the disk can fill up during (e.g. % > because of) sending the mail. % % But if the MTA fail to deliver and it does not queue, it % sends a message back to mutt that the delivery has failed. As I understand you, you use a dumb mailer to hand off to your ISP's smart mail relay where your mail is then sent on its way out to the world. Is that correct? From mutt's point of view, that is no different from any other error that happens off of your box, whether the target machine is unavailable or the recipient mailbox is full or anything else. Your mutt only knows about one single MTA, and you've chosen to use one that only knows how to go and talk to a smarter one. When you get a bounce back, it's AFTER mutt has sent the mail. So now you have the dilemma of whether or not mutt is expected to track and handle every MTA error and condition on all of the hops you make and boxes you meet... I hear that Microsoft tries to accomplish that sort of thing, though I don't put any stock in the idea ;-) THe more I look at it, the more this seems to boil down to a difference between MUA and MTA, and it's quite a Good Thing to allow them to remain separate. HTH & HAND :-D -- David T-G davidtg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://justpickone.org/davidtg/ Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
Attachment:
pgpcMzd45PiA2.pgp
Description: PGP signature