Discussion:
Additional Headers
(too old to reply)
L.Willms
2005-02-25 13:00:27 UTC
Permalink
So, after we have discussed about the standard headers Message-Id,
In-Reply-To, References, Comments and Key-Words, and learned about the
real meaning of the "-raw" option, I have a suggestion.

My assumption that the numbers on "-a1" and "-a2" mean that only two
such additional headers can be added, has not been challenged.

So, I suggest to remove the options "-a1", "-a2", and "-raw", to replace
them by a general "-ah", which can be repeated, and a "-ahf" with as
value the name of file containing additional headers, line by line.

What do you think?

Yours,
Lüko Willms
-----------------------------------------------
Frankfurt/Main
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Chip
2005-02-25 14:21:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by L.Willms
So, after we have discussed about the standard headers Message-Id,
In-Reply-To, References, Comments and Key-Words, and learned about the
real meaning of the "-raw" option, I have a suggestion.
My assumption that the numbers on "-a1" and "-a2" mean that only two
such additional headers can be added, has not been challenged.
So, I suggest to remove the options "-a1", "-a2", and "-raw", to replace
them by a general "-ah", which can be repeated, and a "-ahf" with as
value the name of file containing additional headers, line by line.
What do you think?
Yours,
Lüko Willms
"-a1" and "-a2" were removed at one time, but put back per request. The
original use of the -a1 and -a2 options placed those headers at the top of
the message, I changed the code to move them to the bottom of the headers to
keep headers in better alignment to reduce spamming. "-raw" is tehre
because people use it.

I could add -ah or -ahf without removing the three other options. My first
question is what would you do with this? What kind of headers are you
seeking to add?

Chip
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
namtog
2005-02-25 17:25:51 UTC
Permalink
Greetings,

I came across a application called X-ray mail assistant. It might do
what you want. Here is a brief intro;
"X-Ray Mail Assistant is a powerful mail processor that can filter,
add, change or replace headers in incoming and/or outgoing email
messages. It works with a set of user-defined rules that allow you
to define the header values to be processed, and also perform
additional actions like extracting headers to a text file, or
importing headers from a file."

It's freeware.

Home page;
http://xrayapp.com/xray/

Namtog
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
L.Willms
2005-02-25 16:47:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chip
I could add -ah or -ahf without removing the three other options.
which are -a1, -a2 and -raw
Post by Chip
My first question is what would you do with this?
What kind of headers are you seeking to add?
e.g. those standard headers like In-Reply-To, References, Keywords,
Comments, also non-standard headers like those which are being used by
mailing lists, e.g.

As to -a1 and -a2, I think these would be obsolete anyway, when the
proposed option -ah would be added -- and for the sake of clarity and
ease of use, I would recommend to remove -a1 and -a2. Anyway, it would
be the best, in my opinion, to map within the program the -a1 and -a2
options to the more general -ah option.

As to -raw -- besides the fact that the explanation did really tell me
something completely different -- it might be simpler to build just one
file, i.e. first some header lines, an empty line, and then the body,
instead of building two files, submitting one via a -ahf option, the
other via the -body option. But I would prefer two files for reasons of
clarity and sanity :-))

But, who am I ... to contradict myself by asking new features from a
program which I want to see small, lean and mean...

Yours,
Lüko Willms
-----------------------------------------------
Frankfurt/Main
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Tim Musson
2005-02-26 19:45:00 UTC
Permalink
Hey L.Willms,
Post by Chip
My first question is what would you do with this?
What kind of headers are you seeking to add?
LW> e.g. those standard headers like In-Reply-To, References,
LW> Keywords, Comments, also non-standard headers like those which are
LW> being used by mailing lists, e.g.

LW> As to -a1 and -a2, I think these would be obsolete anyway,

I agree, but we still can't remove the because it would make people
rewrite the way they use Blat if they were to put the current version
in.

LW> when the proposed option -ah would be added -- and for the sake of
LW> clarity and ease of use, I would recommend to remove -a1 and -a2.

Well, what we could do is remove -a1 & -a2 from the syntax output, and
leave it in the code.

LW> Anyway, it would be the best, in my opinion, to map within the
LW> program the -a1 and -a2 options to the more general -ah option.

I don't think it would be a problem to iterate through multiple -ah
options. One reason it has been kept to just 2 in the past is the
possibility for abuse (not that I can think of one off-hand :-).

Unless there are objections, I think we should implement the -ah(f)
option leaving the -a# in the code, but removing them from the syntax.

LW> As to -raw -- besides the fact that the explanation did really
LW> tell me something completely different -- it might be simpler to
LW> build just one file, i.e. first some header lines, an empty line,
LW> and then the body, instead of building two files, submitting one
LW> via a -ahf option, the other via the -body option. But I would
LW> prefer two files for reasons of clarity and sanity :-))

Well, -raw is an attempt to imitate the capability of building a file
(with all the appropriate headers) and passing it directly to Unix
sendmail. This was some apps can be fairly easily written to run on
Unix and call sendmail, or on Windows and call Blat.

LW> But, who am I ... to contradict myself by asking new features from a
LW> program which I want to see small, lean and mean...

Always a good goal !
--
Tim Musson
Flying with The Bat! eMail v2.12.00
I can send email, but I can't receive it! What do I do?
Blat Manager, current version is 2.4, see www.blat.net
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
L.Willms
2005-02-27 07:09:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Musson
Well, -raw is an attempt to imitate the capability of building a file
(with all the appropriate headers) and passing it directly to Unix
sendmail.
Ah ja, so Blat _is_ this pure SMTP-Handler which I mentioned in a
previous message.

So, could I generate a complete message, even multipart, with
MIME-headers, part-separators, etc, and rely on Blat just to handle the
SMTP part?

Would Blat generate a Message-ID nevertheless?

I know, that I could try and figure that out by reading the source
code, but I'm not so fluent in C.


Yours,
Lüko Willms
-----------------------------------------------
Frankfurt/Main
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
namtog
2005-02-27 12:41:42 UTC
Permalink
Greetings,

[tinfoil hat]
Tim wrote;
"Well, -raw is an attempt to imitate the capability
of building a file (with all the appropriate headers)
and passing it directly to Unix sendmail. This was (way?)
some apps can be fairly easily written to run on
Unix and call sendmail, or on Windows and call Blat."

Ah ha. Finally at long last. We are closer to the truth.
After due diligence and study in the black arts that are
Blat the seed of the SDSC (Super Double Secret Command)
has been exposed to the light of day. Did you think that
we would forget? That the search for the truth would grow
stale and the good fight would be abandoned?

Never.

So, the question is why is -raw a NNTP specific option?
Why is it denied to the SMTP user? Is this a example of
simple base bigotry. Payola. Or perhaps clandestine
illicit sexual favors where used to limit this option to
the elite that are NNTP users.

Why must the good faithfull SMTP users be forced to write
endless scripts to convert sendmail talk to blat talk.
When will equality be granted by the powers that be. Do
you think that this secret double standard would stay hidden
for ever. Know this good sir, the SDSC will one day be
exposed to the light of day and there will be a reckoning.

[/tinfoil hat off]

Keeper of the Flame,
Namtog
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Tim Musson
2005-02-27 22:30:38 UTC
Permalink
Hey namtog,

On Sunday, February 27, 2005 at 7:41:42 AM you wrote

n> Ah ha. Finally at long last. We are closer to the truth.
n> After due diligence and study in the black arts that are
n> Blat the seed of the SDSC (Super Double Secret Command)
n> has been exposed to the light of day.

ROTFL !

Always fun to hear you expound here namtog! Thanks I needed the laugh!
--
Tim Musson
Flying with The Bat! eMail v2.12.00
A fatal error has occurred, You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you type may be used against you...
Blat Manager, current version is 2.4, see www.blat.net
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Tim Musson
2005-02-27 22:28:38 UTC
Permalink
Hey L.Willms,

On Sunday, February 27, 2005 at 2:09:30 AM you wrote

LW> Ah ja, so Blat _is_ this pure SMTP-Handler which I mentioned in a
LW> previous message.

That is what -raw is supposted to be (raw rfc2822).

LW> So, could I generate a complete message, even multipart, with
LW> MIME-headers, part-separators, etc, and rely on Blat just to
LW> handle the SMTP part?

Yep!

LW> Would Blat generate a Message-ID nevertheless?

Nope.
--
Tim Musson
Flying with The Bat! eMail v2.12.00
There are more planes in the ocean than submarines in the sky!
Blat Manager, current version is 2.4, see www.blat.net
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Chip
2005-02-28 04:23:37 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by Tim Musson
LW> So, could I generate a complete message, even multipart, with
LW> MIME-headers, part-separators, etc, and rely on Blat just to
LW> handle the SMTP part?
Yep!
LW> Would Blat generate a Message-ID nevertheless?
Nope.
There is no code in Blat to skip the Message-ID header. The answer is that
Blat would build and add a Message-ID header, always.

If Lüko Willms only wants an SMTP engine, he could use Perl.
--
Chip
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
ykai
2005-02-27 14:36:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by L.Willms
Post by Tim Musson
Well, -raw is an attempt to imitate the capability of building a file
(with all the appropriate headers) and passing it directly to Unix
sendmail.
Ah ja, so Blat _is_ this pure SMTP-Handler which I mentioned in a
previous message.
So, could I generate a complete message, even multipart, with
MIME-headers, part-separators, etc, and rely on Blat just to handle the
SMTP part?
Would Blat generate a Message-ID nevertheless?
-raw is actually an option which has been in the code for a long time
under the name -penguin (for whatever reason) but was not really
documented.
It was Chip who made it visible in V2 under the alias -raw
(i.e. "-penguin" is still available for backward compatibility).

As for the exact consequences the option has (apart from the
commandment of "do not add CR/LF after headers" to *blat*
(not to *you*, the user ;-)), I'm not at all knowledgable enough
to give advice.

I only know (and I have indeed done this before) that for a job to
send out self-crafted MIME messages I wouldn't use blat but a tool
which gives me a documented interface to that kind of task
(e. g. the Net::SMTP modul in Perl.)
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
ykai
2005-02-27 14:45:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by namtog
So, the question is why is -raw a NNTP specific option?
The option actually is an artefact from a time long preceeding
NNTP support in Blat (see my last message in reply to Lüko).
What did give the impression it is NNTP related in the first place?
Inquiring minds want to know...
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
namtog
2005-02-27 14:55:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by ykai
Post by namtog
So, the question is why is -raw a NNTP specific option?
The option actually is an artefact from a time long preceeding
NNTP support in Blat (see my last message in reply to Lüko).
What did give the impression it is NNTP related in the first place?
Inquiring minds want to know...
Greetings,

In the Blat doc file syntax.html -raw is listed under NNTP specific
options. I couldn't find it listed any place else.

Are you saying that it works with SMTP? Could the doc file be
mistaken. Yet more proof of the SDSC.

By the way it's Namtog not mantog.

Skeptically,
Namtog
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Qe'van, Bard of Nor
2005-02-28 02:15:58 UTC
Permalink
Quoting namtog..

To: ***@yahoogroups.com
From: "namtog" <***@yahoo.com>
Date sent: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 14:55:01 -0000
Subject: [blat] Re: Additional Headers
Post by namtog
By the way it's Namtog not mantog.
Then I suggest you change how yahoo displays your name.

Yes, I know it said 'mantog' in the other quote line, but
I've seen you ding someone for saying 'namtog' (without
capitalization) before. :)
--
Qe'van, Bard of Nor
http://qevan.home.comcast.net/poetry/
http://texasfilk.home.comcast.net/

... 'What's there to understand? Just kill her and get a new one.' 3rd Rock


LD 2004-11-10
2005-01-02
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
namtog
2005-02-28 12:33:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Qe'van, Bard of Nor
Quoting namtog..
Post by namtog
By the way it's Namtog not mantog.
Then I suggest you change how yahoo displays your name.
Don't get me started on the Yahoo display. I am as
baffled as anyone when it comes to that.
Post by Qe'van, Bard of Nor
Yes, I know it said 'mantog' in the other quote line, but
I've seen you ding someone for saying 'namtog' (without
capitalization) before. :)
At this point I'm almost sorry I mentioned it. If it becomes
a issue again I will simply change my name. Something more
modern. Something with punch. Maybe I'll use Joe or John.

Nomenclaturely yours,
Namtog or Joe or John
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
ykai
2005-02-27 15:43:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by namtog
In the Blat doc file syntax.html -raw is listed under NNTP specific
options. I couldn't find it listed any place else.
For what I can see, -groups is the only option listed in the NNTP
specific option group.

-raw lists under "Other options", like -h, -debug, -log and the like
Post by namtog
By the way it's Namtog not mantog.
Yeah, sorry. Bad typing all the way..
Post by namtog
Skeptically,
I'm all for putting tinfoil hats into the open source...
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
namtog
2005-02-27 16:38:15 UTC
Permalink
Greetings,

[tinfoil hat]
Ykai wrote;
"For what I can see, -groups is the only option listed in the NNTP
specific option group.

-raw lists under "Other options", like -h, -debug, -log and the like"

You have long been known as a solid steadfast contributor to
this newsgroup. I'm surprised you fell for such a simple ruse
from TMO (The Minions of Orthodoxy). "Other options" is
clearly listed under the specific option group.

Misdirection is a common tactic used to hide THE TRUTH.

I would suggest a long hot bath with epson salts and oil of
clove to regain your mojo.

[/tinfoil hat]

Back to what Tim wrote;
"Well, -raw is an attempt to imitate the capability of building a
file (with all the appropriate headers) and passing it directly to
Unix sendmail. This was some apps can be fairly easily written to
run on Unix and call sendmail, or on Windows and call Blat."

Many times you will see in different apps and scripts;
# Path to sendmail
$mailProg = "sendmail -t";

So according to Tim's comments something like this should also work;
# Path to sendmail
$mailProg = "blat -raw -t";

or maybe just;
# Path to sendmail
$mailProg = "blat -raw";

I've tried many variations and called as a CGI I have never got
it to work. One thing I do wish is that the Blat CGI specific
features where identified.

For some time I have been lobbying for a sendmail clone option.
Just for simple emails, nothing fancy. I suggest it be named SDSC.
IndigoMail works well but stores the account info in a plain text
file (sendmal.ini). The registry is better than that.
http://www.indigostar.com/sendmail.htm

You wrote;
"I'm all for putting tinfoil hats into the open source..."
Know of any thing in particular or perhaps a news group for this.

Following my muse,
Namtog
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Tim Musson
2005-02-27 22:27:05 UTC
Permalink
Hey namtog,

On Sunday, February 27, 2005 at 11:38:15 AM you wrote

n> Back to what Tim wrote;
n> "Well, -raw is an attempt to imitate the capability of building a
n> file (with all the appropriate headers) and passing it directly to
n> Unix sendmail. This was some apps can be fairly easily written to
n> run on Unix and call sendmail, or on Windows and call Blat."

n> Many times you will see in different apps and scripts;
n> # Path to sendmail
n> $mailProg = "sendmail -t";

n> So according to Tim's comments something like this should also work;
n> # Path to sendmail
n> $mailProg = "blat -raw -t";

n> or maybe just;
n> # Path to sendmail
n> $mailProg = "blat -raw";

Ok, I guess I should be a bit clearer... I see an smtp message broken
down into 2 basic parts.
1. Envelope information like
MAIL FROM:***@Mail.tld, and
RCPT TO:***@Mail.tld
2. Everything else.

#2 contains the Subject:, Message-ID:, User-Agent:, X-Mailer:,
From: (which is potentially different from MAIL FROM:), Date:,
the message body and attachments.

So you create file with all of #2 in it (correctly formatted of
course) and use Blat to send it like this:
blat file.raw -to ***@Mail.tld -f myself -server localhost

The option was originally -penguin as ykai pointed out, but it always
made me think of Linux (which it really didn't have anything to do
with). So Chip and I decided it should be added to the syntax as -raw,
because it is designed to take a 'raw' rfc2822 SMTP message and send
it using the Envelope information.

n> I've tried many variations and called as a CGI I have never got
n> it to work. One thing I do wish is that the Blat CGI specific
n> features where identified.

Hmmm, I think most of them work in CGI, with the exception of being
able to attach a file (because then you could format a ULR from a
remote machine and send yourself a file - the SAM database for
example!)

n> For some time I have been lobbying for a sendmail clone option.
n> Just for simple emails, nothing fancy. I suggest it be named SDSC.

What specifically would you like? I don't recall it being mentioned
before.
--
Tim Musson
Flying with The Bat! eMail v2.12.00
Error, no keyboard - press F1 to continue.
Blat Manager, current version is 2.4, see www.blat.net
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
namtog
2005-02-27 23:34:54 UTC
Permalink
Greetings Tim.

You wrote;
"Ok, I guess I should be a bit clearer. . ."
Thanks for taking the time for the long explanation. Sorry
I'm a little dense at times. Email at the level discussed
here is still a bit much for me. Fascinating, but
difficult.

Then you wrote;
"Hmmm, I think most of them work in CGI, with the exception of being
able to attach a file (because then you could format a ULR from a
remote machine and send yourself a file - the SAM database for
example!)"

The only one I want to get to work is the Blat splash
screen. I've never been able to call it in my little
NBI script. If you look you will see I'm using a
error message.
http://geocities.com/namtog/files/nbi01.htm
Not a big thing, would be nice thou.

Now on to:
"n> For some time I have been lobbying for a sendmail clone option.
n> Just for simple emails, nothing fancy. I suggest it be named SDSC.

t>What specifically would you like? I don't recall it being mentioned
t>before."

Quite some time ago I had another tinfoil hat rant. In it
I suggested that there be a new Blat command, SDSC. This
would instruct Blat to enter a Sendmail emulator mode. With
a call like this;
# Path to sendmail
$mailProg = "blat -SDSC";
I doubt that this feature will ever be implemented. The Super
Double Secret Command will most likely remain a unfulfilled wish.

In my recent rant I came out with;
"So, the question is why is -raw a NNTP specific option?"
which was a little bit of theatrical license. I needed
a way to flesh out the bit.

Glad you don't mind me venting here once in a while.
I would bet real money Namtog is in a lot of peoples
kill file :).

Namtog
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Tim Musson
2005-02-28 01:47:24 UTC
Permalink
Hey namtog,

On Sunday, February 27, 2005 at 6:34:54 PM you wrote

n> Then you wrote;
n> "Hmmm, I think most of them work in CGI, with the exception of being
n> able to attach a file (because then you could format a ULR from a
n> remote machine and send yourself a file - the SAM database for
n> example!)"

n> The only one I want to get to work is the Blat splash
n> screen. I've never been able to call it in my little
n> NBI script. If you look you will see I'm using a
n> error message.
n> http://geocities.com/namtog/files/nbi01.htm
n> Not a big thing, would be nice thou.

Not sure what you mean by the Blat splash screen...?
--
Tim Musson
Flying with The Bat! eMail v2.12.00
What could possibly go wrong?
Blat Manager, current version is 2.4, see www.blat.net
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
namtog
2005-02-28 12:24:14 UTC
Permalink
Greetings,

Tim asked;
"Not sure what you mean by the Blat splash screen...?"

Type Blat at prompt;

Blat v2.4 w/GSS encryption (build : Jan 15 2005 08:32:11)


Win32 console utility to send mail via SMTP or post to usenet via
NNTP
by
P.Mendes,M.Neal,G.Vollant,T.Charron,T.Musson,H.Pesonen,A.Donchey,C.Hy
de
http://www.blat.net
syntax:
Blat <filename> -to <recipient> [optional switches (see below)]
Blat -install <server addr> <sender's addr> [<try>[<port>
[<profile>]]] [-q]
Blat -profile [-delete | "<default>"] [profile1] [profileN] [-q]
Blat -h


Splashing about,
Namtog
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Tim Musson
2005-02-28 12:40:33 UTC
Permalink
Hey namtog,
Post by namtog
"Not sure what you mean by the Blat splash screen...?"
n> Type Blat at prompt;

n> Blat v2.4 w/GSS encryption (build : Jan 15 2005 08:32:11)

Ah, I get it now. IIRC, that is not part of the CGI...
--
Tim Musson
Flying with The Bat! eMail v2.12.00
Does the noise in my head bother you?
Blat Manager, current version is 2.4, see www.blat.net
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Tim Musson
2005-02-28 01:51:28 UTC
Permalink
Hey namtog,

On Sunday, February 27, 2005 at 6:34:54 PM you wrote

n> Quite some time ago I had another tinfoil hat rant. In it
n> I suggested that there be a new Blat command, SDSC. This
n> would instruct Blat to enter a Sendmail emulator mode. With
n> a call like this;
n> # Path to sendmail
n> $mailProg = "blat -SDSC";
n> I doubt that this feature will ever be implemented. The Super
n> Double Secret Command will most likely remain a unfulfilled wish.

Ah, yes, I do remember that now. I think the problem is that there are
too many things that would be needed. It would be much easier to get a
port of sendmail for Win32 (I think one exists doesn't it?). You know,
which things would we implement and which leave out (I guess I am
assuming you know sendmail has a _huge_ number of options.)

n> Glad you don't mind me venting here once in a while.

I don't mind at all. Actually I think it lightens up this fairly
technical 'beginners' type list.
--
Tim Musson
Flying with The Bat! eMail v2.12.00
Always remember you're unique... Just like everyone else.
Blat Manager, current version is 2.4, see www.blat.net
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
ykai
2005-02-27 17:53:54 UTC
Permalink
Namtog (sic!) wrote:
(snipped tinfoil wrapped content)
Post by namtog
Back to what Tim wrote;
"Well, -raw is an attempt to imitate the capability of building a
file (with all the appropriate headers) and passing it directly to
Unix sendmail. This was some apps can be fairly easily written to
run on Unix and call sendmail, or on Windows and call Blat."
Many times you will see in different apps and scripts;
# Path to sendmail
$mailProg = "sendmail -t";
So according to Tim's comments something like this should also work;
# Path to sendmail
$mailProg = "blat -raw -t";
The problem IMHO is that blat will seek for other mandatory options
on the command line.
For example blat will *not* parse your supplied message for either
addressing header lines (To:, CC:) or a subject.
So if there is no recipient supplied via command option no message
will be sent.
And if no subject is given blat will generate something along the
line of "content of ..." for it.

I would stress the word "attempt" in Tim's declaration, and from
what I know from Blats internals, it could be attributed "not really
convincing" ;-)
Post by namtog
For some time I have been lobbying for a sendmail clone option.
Just for simple emails, nothing fancy. I suggest it be named SDSC.
I see no difficulties sending simple emails with blat. I do it
quite often actually.
Post by namtog
IndigoMail works well but stores the account info in a plain text
file (sendmal.ini). The registry is better than that.
Well, if it works otherwise, that's maybe not a real obstacle.
Post by namtog
http://www.indigostar.com/sendmail.htm
$49,- for such a tool? They must be kidding.
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Chip
2005-02-28 04:33:21 UTC
Permalink
<snipped>
Post by ykai
And if no subject is given blat will generate something along the
line of "content of ..." for it.
<snipped>

To skip the subject line, use -ss.
--
Chip
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
ykai
2005-02-27 23:51:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Musson
LW> So, could I generate a complete message, even multipart, with
LW> MIME-headers, part-separators, etc, and rely on Blat just to
LW> handle the SMTP part?
Yep!
making a simple as possible test as in:

blat test.txt -to myself -server localhost -raw -superdebugt

I see the following header lines generated by blat on it's own:
,---
|Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:22:56 +0100
|From: ...
|To: ...
|X-Mailer: Blat v2.4.1 w/GSS encryption, a Win32 SMTP/NNTP
| mailer http://www.blat.net
|Message-ID: <01c51d23$Blat.v2.4.0$***@localhost>
|Subject: Contents of file: test.txt
|Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
|Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
`---

Out of these
a) X-Mailer: can be avoided with -noh2
b) To: can be avoided with using -b (instead of -to)
c) Subject: has to be given on the command line, so can't be
handled in the -raw header

Additionally, how could one get rid of
Message-ID, Content-Transfer-Encoding, Content-Type
to provide self generated values, which would be especially
necessary for the content-* header lines in the case of
external crafted messages?

If there is no "solution" for these, I would answer Lüko's
question with "Nope".
Post by Tim Musson
LW> Would Blat generate a Message-ID nevertheless?
Nope.
It will...
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Tim Musson
2005-02-28 01:52:56 UTC
Permalink
Hey ykai,
Post by Tim Musson
LW> So, could I generate a complete message, even multipart, with
LW> MIME-headers, part-separators, etc, and rely on Blat just to
LW> handle the SMTP part?
Yep!
y> making a simple as possible test as in:

y> blat test.txt -to myself -server localhost -raw -superdebugt

y> I see the following header lines generated by blat on it's own:
y> ,---
y> |Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:22:56 +0100
y> |From: ...
y> |To: ...
y> |X-Mailer: Blat v2.4.1 w/GSS encryption, a Win32 SMTP/NNTP
y> | mailer http://www.blat.net
y> |Message-ID: <01c51d23$Blat.v2.4.0$***@localhost>
y> |Subject: Contents of file: test.txt
y> |Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
y> |Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
y> `---

y> Out of these
y> a) X-Mailer: can be avoided with -noh2
y> b) To: can be avoided with using -b (instead of -to)
y> c) Subject: has to be given on the command line, so can't be
y> handled in the -raw header

y> Additionally, how could one get rid of
y> Message-ID, Content-Transfer-Encoding, Content-Type
y> to provide self generated values, which would be especially
y> necessary for the content-* header lines in the case of
y> external crafted messages?

y> If there is no "solution" for these, I would answer Lüko's
y> question with "Nope".
Post by Tim Musson
LW> Would Blat generate a Message-ID nevertheless?
Nope.
y> It will...

Interesting, I have not played with -raw in quite a while, so maybe I
should go back and play again (in all my free time LOL). If/when I do,
I will see about writing up something for the web site.
--
Tim Musson
Flying with The Bat! eMail v2.12.00
Men are from here, and women are from way over there.
Blat Manager, current version is 2.4, see www.blat.net
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Romson Christer
2005-02-28 10:04:49 UTC
Permalink
Well, what we could do is remove -a1 & -a2 from the syntax output, and leave it in the code. ... Unless there are objections, I think we should implement the -ah(f) option leaving the -a# in the code, but removing them from the syntax.
I object! Removing them from the syntax ouptut would be a Bad Thing. Instead rewrite it to say that one should use -ah but -a1 & -a2 are still there for backwards compatibility.

If you remove them completely from the syntax, new people will have to read the blat source when maintaining old bat files just to find out what those undocumented switches do.

Christer Romson
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
L.Willms
2005-02-28 10:11:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chip
If Lüko Willms only wants an SMTP engine, he could use Perl.
The solution cannot lie in changing the script language, or not using
my own EXE programs calling BLAT.DLL.
Post by Chip
There is no code in Blat to skip the Message-ID header.
The answer is that Blat would build and add a Message-ID header,
always.
At least I know. So, either I live with it, or look for a "sendmail"
port, or I sit down and modify the Blat source -- my C is getting rusty
anyway after I went to the C and C++ course last year. Or something
completely different. Or I write my own SMTP engine, in Delpi or ...
Visual Basic (huh).

Yours,
Lüko Willms
-----------------------------------------------
Frankfurt/Main
--
Homepage:
http://www.blat.net
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...