Strange issue with From: line

[Mike Brown]

Mutt version: Mutt 1.9.1
Exim version: 4.89 #1 built 01-Dec-2017 12:50:23

I was running exim and mutt on an old Solaris system. I finally moved over
to my new Linux box, which is now at Fedora 27. I copied over the config
files.

But, I had discovered that the "From: " line was incomplete. It was:

***@mrvideo

Also, when I sent test mail to myself, the Mutt "To" line was changed to
the above value.

I just could not figure out what was going on. Looking at the hosts file,
I only had mrvideo in there, so I added mrvideo.vidiot.com before the
simple name. That didn't make a difference.

A friend sent me his exim.conf file and I did a comparison and noticed
that my qualify_domain was unset and his was. I set it, even though the
exim configuration has nothing to do with mutt. But, I still sent
myself a test mail to see if the From: line was fixed. I then noticed
that the mutt To line was also fixed. The resulting From: header was
also fixed.

So, I am curious as to why modifying the exim.conf file caused mutt to
now have the correct info?

Thanks for any info as to why that worked.

MB

[Ian Zimmerman]

Post by Mike Brown
I was running exim and mutt on an old Solaris system. I finally moved
over to my new Linux box, which is now at Fedora 27. I copied over
the config files.

On Solaris, the hostname(1) command (and maybe even the uname(2)
syscall, I do not remember anymore) return the FQDN, unlike Linux, where
they return the bare hostname. So if some part of the configuration
relied on one of these interfaces to get the FQDN, you'd get the
behavior you see.

Post by Mike Brown
Also, when I sent test mail to myself, the Mutt "To" line was changed
to the above value.

It is unclear what you mean here. Do you mean the header in the message
after it went through the SMTP sausage factory and you received it back?
Or do you mean the default value mutt gives you while you compose an
outgoing message?

[Mike Brown]

Post by Ian Zimmerman

Post by Mike Brown
I was running exim and mutt on an old Solaris system. I finally moved
over to my new Linux box, which is now at Fedora 27. I copied over
the config files.

On Solaris, the hostname(1) command (and maybe even the uname(2)
syscall, I do not remember anymore) return the FQDN, unlike Linux, where
they return the bare hostname. So if some part of the configuration
relied on one of these interfaces to get the FQDN, you'd get the
behavior you see.

Yep, I was reminded of this difference by a friend. Doesn't explain
why changing the exim.conf file "qualify_domain" setting fixed the
"To " composing issue with mutt.

Post by Ian Zimmerman

Post by Mike Brown
Also, when I sent test mail to myself, the Mutt "To" line was changed
to the above value.

It is unclear what you mean here. Do you mean the header in the message
after it went through the SMTP sausage factory and you received it back?
Or do you mean the default value mutt gives you while you compose an
outgoing message?

Sorry, the default value that mutt provides while composing the message.

MB

[Ian Zimmerman]

Post by Mike Brown
Yep, I was reminded of this difference by a friend. Doesn't explain
why changing the exim.conf file "qualify_domain" setting fixed the
"To" composing issue with mutt.

Could be it be the context in mutt where you start composing ? For me,
mutt defaults the To of a new message to the From address of the current
message selected in the index, or the one being viewed in the pager.
So, it will use the FQDN for To or not depending on the existing
message's From.

If not that, it beats me as well :-(

[Mike Brown]

Post by Ian Zimmerman

Post by Mike Brown
Yep, I was reminded of this difference by a friend. Doesn't explain
why changing the exim.conf file "qualify_domain" setting fixed the
"To" composing issue with mutt.

Could be it be the context in mutt where you start composing ? For me,
mutt defaults the To of a new message to the From address of the current
message selected in the index, or the one being viewed in the pager.
So, it will use the FQDN for To or not depending on the existing
message's From.
If not that, it beats me as well :-(

In this case it is a new message, not a reply.

Nice to know that I've managed to confuse someone else as well. :-)

MB