Using dif. sending addresses with sendmail

[Charles G]

I use a few email domains and wondred what the best way to handle this would be - as for as SENDMAIL?

 

[Steve Fabian]

From: Charles G
Subject: [Support-t-3301] Using dif. sending addresses with sendmail

| I use a few email domains and wondred what the best way to handle
| this would be - as for as SENDMAIL?

Dear Charles:
Please remember that the "subject" is not part of the post, it is used only for threading. Those of us who read via email see the subject in very tiny font, compared with the message body.

To respond to the substance of your question, it depends on whether or not the domain-related directives in TCMD.INI can be changed dynamically using the OPTION //directive=value syntax. Assuming a positive answer, you would need to create either an alias or a batch file to make those changes whenever you want to change which of your email addresses you want to use. However, if sending through the default address is OK, the SENDMAIL command has the /E reply-to address option, so responses will be sent to the address you desire.
--
HTH, Steve

 

[DMcCunney]

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Steve Fabian <> wrote:

> From: Charles G
> Subject: [Support-t-3301] Using dif. sending addresses with sendmail

> Please remember that the "subject" is not part of the post, it is used only for threading. Those of us who read via email see the subject in very tiny font, compared with the message body.

What are you using to read email? I certainly don't see tiny
Subject/large text body. I expect a decent email client to make that
configurable.
______
Dennis

 

[Steve Fabian]

From: DMcCunney
| What are you using to read email? I certainly don't see tiny
| Subject/large text body. I expect a decent email client to make that
| configurable.

Outlook Express in WinXP. Message body is configurable; incoming message header info is picked up from the "Display Properties" theme. Mozilla Thunderbird has similar properties. In both the only method I found to increase incoming message header font size is to reduce screen resolution, making most everything bigger.
--
Steve

 

[DMcCunney]

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Steve Fabian <> wrote:

> From: DMcCunney
> | What are you using to read email? I certainly don't see tiny
> | Subject/large text body. I expect a decent email client to make that
> | configurable.
>
> Outlook Express in WinXP. Message body is configurable; incoming message header info is picked up from the "Display Properties" theme. Mozilla Thunderbird has similar properties. In both the only method I found to increase incoming message header font size is to reduce screen resolution, making most everything bigger.

By default, Outlook Express here displays header info in the same font
size as the message body. You've adjusted the default text display
size to be larger?

TBird also does something similar, though the header font defaults to
sans serif and I have text font set to a serif font. The amount of
header to show is configurable, and the Subject appears bolded here.
(You can make further adjustments using CSS.)

> Steve

______
Dennis

 

[Steve Fabian]

From: DMcCunney
| By default, Outlook Express here displays header info in the same font
| size as the message body. You've adjusted the default text display
| size to be larger?

Yes, large "text" size, and it is dynamically adjustable anyway. Cannot adjust header size, even though I'd like to make them bigger. Another thing I cannot do with headers is to create a (preferrably text) file with just the headers.

| TBird also does something similar, though the header font defaults to
| sans serif and I have text font set to a serif font. The amount of
| header to show is configurable, and the Subject appears bolded here.
| (You can make further adjustments using CSS.)

I have not tried T-bird lately, but I've given up on it some time ago, becasue in real NG-s (not like this one) it kept gettin confused as to what has been downloaded already. When trying to download just the new psots it often reverts to downloading the thousands of already present older posts, too. Of course, in OE I now have many message rules to deliver new posts into their proper folders, e.g., separate folders for each JPsoft subforum, and I'd not like to redo them.

Thanks!
--
Steve

 

[DMcCunney]

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Steve Fabian <> wrote:

> From: DMcCunney
> | By default, Outlook Express here displays header info in the same font
> | size as the message body. You've adjusted the default text display
> | size to be larger?
>
> Yes, large "text" size, and it is dynamically adjustable anyway. Cannot adjust header size, even though I'd like to make them bigger. Another thing I cannot do with headers is to create a (preferrably text) file with just the headers.

Fair enough. I run in 1280x1024 resolution, find the default header
size readable, and left text size at the default Medium as well. (But
in practice, I don't use OE at all. I just invoked it here to check
what you were unhappy about.)

> | TBird also does something similar, though the header font defaults to
> | sans serif and I have text font set to a serif font. The amount of
> | header to show is configurable, and the Subject appears bolded here.
> | (You can make further adjustments using CSS.)
>
> I have not tried T-bird lately, but I've given up on it some time ago, becasue in real NG-s (not like this one) it kept gettin confused as to what has been downloaded already. When trying to download just the new psots it often reverts to downloading the thousands of already present older posts, too. Of course, in OE I now have many message rules to deliver new posts into their proper folders, e.g., separate folders for each JPsoft subforum, and I'd not like to redo them.

I use GMail as my primary account, and read it in Firefox. I prefer
the web interface, and have no need for a local copy of 99.9% of the
mail I get. It's welcome to live on Google's servers. It's easy
enough to grab a copy if I need something.

I used to use full Outlook for email back when I was getting email
through POP. Part of it was for compatibility with the office. The
other part was that I needed filtering more powerful than OE's "IF
<condition> THEN <action>" scheme.

GMail has good filtering, and I have things like the JPSoft forms
sorted automatically.

I use TBird as a newsreader. I saw the issue with TB getting confused
about what was already read. Each newsserver has an RC file where
that information is stored, and TB wasn't correctly updating the RC
file. I could fix things by opening the RC file in a text editor and
changing the entries for the newsgroups it was confused about. (There
was an open bug about it in Bugzilla at one point. I haven't checked
the status lately.)

I currently run TBird 8 beta and haven't seen the problem in a while.
The one thing I wish TBird could do is let me diddle the header before
posting. I read one group that requires that to be able to post. I
can do that with something like XNews or Gravity, but it hasn't been a
big enough need to get me to switch.

> Thanks!

You're welcome.

> Steve

______
Dennis

 

[Steve Fabian]

From: DMcCunney
| Fair enough. I run in 1280x1024 resolution, find the default header
| size readable, and left text size at the default Medium as well. (But
| in practice, I don't use OE at all. I just invoked it here to check
| what you were unhappy about.)

My eyesight is declining, text size default is largest. I rarely use 1280x1024, my normal is 1024x768. That's where the header size is readable in the control panel, but not when I maximize an individual message. When respondig, the header is displayed in a larger font...

| I use GMail as my primary account, and read it in Firefox. I prefer
| the web interface, and have no need for a local copy of 99.9% of the
| mail I get. It's welcome to live on Google's servers. It's easy
| enough to grab a copy if I need something.

I prefer my local copy, searching through them is much more powerful, and I don't need connectivity. I do NOT want my private mail to be on an unprotected public server. Just recently Borders went out of business, and their whole database was purchased by Barnes&Noble. I don't know what privacy rules the bankruptcy court imposed on the buyer, but I don't want to rely on such fickle future. Besides, it is much easier to switch email servers if all your critical data is on your own system. The diskspace used is trivial.
...
| GMail has good filtering, and I have things like the JPSoft forms
| sorted automatically.

My new phone requires a gmail account to use some of its features. I don't have one, my 14-year old daughter's is used instead...

| I use TBird as a newsreader. I saw the issue with TB getting confused
| about what was already read. Each newsserver has an RC file where
| that information is stored, and TB wasn't correctly updating the RC
| file. I could fix things by opening the RC file in a text editor and
| changing the entries for the newsgroups it was confused about. (There
| was an open bug about it in Bugzilla at one point. I haven't checked
| the status lately.)
|
| I currently run TBird 8 beta and haven't seen the problem in a while.
| The one thing I wish TBird could do is let me diddle the header before
| posting. I read one group that requires that to be able to post. I
| can do that with something like XNews or Gravity, but it hasn't been a
| big enough need to get me to switch.

I'll have to try it again...
--
Steve

 

[Charles G]

I had sent the orginal posting using OE under Win XP pro sp3
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Fabian
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 06:39 AM
Subject: RE: [Support-t-3301] Using dif. sending addresses with sendmail


From: DMcCunney
| What are you using to read email? I certainly don't see tiny
| Subject/large text body. I expect a decent email client to make that
| configurable.

Outlook Express in WinXP. Message body is configurable; incoming message header info is picked up from the "Display Properties" theme. Mozilla Thunderbird has similar properties. In both the only method I found to increase incoming message header font size is to reduce screen resolution, making most everything bigger.
--
Steve

 

[DMcCunney]

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Steve Fabian <> wrote:

> From: DMcCunney
> | Fair enough. I run in 1280x1024 resolution, find the default header
> | size readable, and left text size at the default Medium as well. (But
> | in practice, I don't use OE at all. I just invoked it here to check
> | what you were unhappy about.)
>
> My eyesight is declining, text size default is largest. I rarely use 1280x1024, my normal is 1024x768. That's where the header size is readable in the control panel, but not when I maximize an individual message. When respondig, the header is displayed in a larger font...

I used to run in 1600x1200 before the old monitor died. 1280x1024 is
the best the current one will do.

> | I use GMail as my primary account, and read it in Firefox. I prefer
> | the web interface, and have no need for a local copy of 99.9% of the
> | mail I get. It's welcome to live on Google's servers. It's easy
> | enough to grab a copy if I need something.
>
> I prefer my local copy, searching through them is much more powerful, and I don't need connectivity.

My GMail store is a database, searchable via standard Google search
functions. Instead of folders, GMail uses labels and filters. To
sort things and classify them, I use filters that apply labels, and
optionally prevent things from appearing in my Inbox. Clicking on the
label list to the left of the GMail Inbox screen displays all messages
with that label applied. It acts like a folder. The advantage is
that you can apply more than one label to a message, and thus have the
same message appear in more than one "folder". Labels are arbitrary
index keys into the GMail database. I've found search to be more
powerful this way than it was when I used Outlook and downloaded via
POP.

Connectivity isn't a concern here because I have an always on
broadband connection.

> I do NOT want my private mail to be on an unprotected public server. Just recently Borders went out of business, and their whole database was purchased by Barnes&Noble. I don't know what privacy rules the bankruptcy court imposed on the buyer, but I don't want to rely on such fickle future. Besides, it is much easier to switch email servers if all your critical data is on your own system. The diskspace used is trivial.
> ...

I wouldn't call GMail's servers "public and unprotected." Google
offers their services to businesses as well as individuals, and takes
security *very* seriously indeed.

Under what circumstances might someone be able to read my mail?

1) They hack my account. That's unlikely, as I use a non-trivial
email password, and follow all of Google's security guidelines.

2) They hack Google's servers. That's even more unlikely. Like I
said, Google takes security seriously. I've never heard of a major
exploit being pulled off against them.

3) They work for Google and are GMail admins. Well, I suppose they
*could* read my mail, but why would they *bother*? They have millions
of users and terabytes of mail. The folks at Google have far better
things to do with their time than snoop in *my* mail, and no reason to
so so in any case.

4) They're police and want to monitor my communications. The response
of Google, and any other legitimate ISP will be "Show us your court
order." And the cops have even less reason to look at my mail than
the mail admins. I'm not doing anything they'd take a professional
interest in.

(Note that all of the above apply to *any* ISP email, and are not
specific to Google. Back when I got POP mail from my ISP, the ISP
folks could have viewed it while it was on their servers.)

And ultimately, I don't*care*. I've never seen email as all that
secure, so as a rule I don't say stuff in email I'd have heartburn
about becoming public. Unless you're me, 99.9% of my email will be
mystifying or terminally boring. Read all you want, but don't say I
didn't warn you...

For the vanishing rare occasions where I *am* concerned about message
security, well, that's what public key encryption is for.

My allocated GMail mail store is 7.6GB and counting, of which I've
used about half. I consider that non-trivial.

I grant you, it would be hard to switch email providers, but I have no
current reason to want to, and don't anticipate having one.

Re the Borders acquisition, B&N bought Borders customer lists, but
AFAIK did *not* get CC numbers as part of the deal. There have been
various complaints that B&N privacy policy wasn't as stringent as
Borders. I had a Borders account and a B&N account, and see the whole
thing as a tempest in a teapot. I was *not* troubled by the sale, and
if I were B&N, I'd have bought the lists too.

> | GMail has good filtering, and I have things like the JPSoft forms
> | sorted automatically.
>
> My new phone requires a gmail account to use some of its features. I don't have one, my 14-year old daughter's is used instead...

A Google account is a worthwhile thing to have. It's single-signon.
The account I use for GMail is also used for Google Docs, Google
Sites, Google Groups, Google Plus, and any other service Google
offers.

> | I use TBird as a newsreader. I saw the issue with TB getting confused
> | about what was already read. Each newsserver has an RC file where
> | that information is stored, and TB wasn't correctly updating the RC
> | file.
> |
> | I currently run TBird 8 beta and haven't seen the problem in a while.
>
> I'll have to try it again...

It's worth a look. Thunderbird is now using the same rapid release
model as other Mozilla apps, so expect a new majo0r version every
three months.

> Steve

______
Dennis

 

[Charles G]

2) Have you heard of other email servers being hacked?

etc-1) Is that the lartgest inbox you have heard of? I heard Yahoo has unlimited???
----- Original Message -----
From: DMcCunney
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 02:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Support-t-3301] Using dif. sending addresses with sendmail

[snip...]


2) They hack Google's servers. That's even more unlikely. Like I
said, Google takes security seriously. I've never heard of a major
exploit being pulled off against them.

[snip]

etc-1) My allocated GMail mail store is 7.6GB and counting, of which I've
used about half. I consider that non-trivial.

[snip]

> | GMail has good filtering, and I have things like the JPSoft forms
> | sorted automatically.
>
> My new phone requires a gmail account to use some of its features. I don't have one, my 14-year old daughter's is used instead...

Very easy to sort mail in gmail. I use the TO: address for my JPsoft sorting
[snip]

 

[DMcCunney]

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Charles G <> wrote:

> 2) Have you heard of other email servers being hacked?

No, but I haven't checked lately. I'm really not concerned about
Google getting hacked.

> etc-1) Is that the largest inbox you have heard of? *I heard Yahoo has unlimited???

I have no idea what the largest mail store might be. On my ISP
account, my email Inbox has a low storage limit, and I had occasional
problems in the past with mail bouncing because I was traveling, and
could not DL mail and delete it from the server frequently enough. I
have GMail poll my ISP account, so it's no longer a concern.

GMail started with a 2GB/user limit, then changed to a continually
growing model. My current allocation is 7.6GB, but it grows
incrementally. As mentioned, I've actually used about half. (And
just went through an exercise where I purged a lot of old mail I no
longer needed, like email from vendors announcing special sales that
long ago expired.)

Yahoo may be unlimited now, but who cares? I don't like their mail
interface or their policies. (And how long they will continue to
exist is open to question. Their founder is reported to be trying to
get financing to take it private. We'll see whether he succeeds.) I
have a Yahoo account, and maintain it solely for the odd case where I
need to send an attachment containing an executable. Yahoo permits
that. Google does not.

If by some chance I actually use up my allocated Google mail store, I
can purchase additional storage for a low price, but I don't see that
happening any time soon.
______
Dennis