[rt-users] Retrieving mail from Outlook Server

[Brett Barnhart]

Interesting, when I dump the email to a file and then try to read it in, it
succeeds, but the requestor, subject, etc don't come through.

The email in the file looks like
MAIL FROM: BrettB at hkusa.com
 RCPT TO: BrettB at localhost
 DATA 
Received: from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] 	
  by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-6.2.5) 	
  for BrettB at localhost (single-drop); Fri, 28 May 2004 09:48:36 -0500 (CDT) 
Received: by EXCHANGE4  	
id <01C444C2.57574DA0 at EXCHANGE4>; Fri, 28 May 2004 09:44:55 -0500 
Message-ID: <2E8440B99F0D1B4F9D4F3099A3778FB507179D0E at EXCHANGE4> 
From: Brett Barnhart <BrettB at hkusa.com> 
To: rtadmin RT Testing <rtadmin at hkusa.com> 
Subject: test again 
Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 09:44:55 -0500 
MIME-Version: 1.0 
Content-Type: text/plain; 	
charset="iso-8859-1"  
Another test 
.

The only thing created in the rt is
Another test
.


So, it looks like things aren't be parsed out correctly.

If I remove all the header information down to 'From:' it works correctly.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sebastian Flothow [mailto:lists at flothow.de]
> Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 6:13 AM
> To: Brett Barnhart
> Cc: 'rt-users at lists.bestpractical.com'
> Subject: Re: [rt-users] Retrieving mail from Outlook Server
> 
> 
> Am 27. Mai 2004 um 16:56 Uhr schrieb Brett Barnhart:
> > Doing as you suggest does indeed create a ticket, which
> > suggests that rt-mailgate is OK.
> 
> Does it provide any interesting output?
> 
> 
> > Is there someway to debug rt-mailgate when used with 
> Fetchmail as you 
> > do
> > below?
> 
> You can add the --debug option to the rt-mailgate call in 
> rt-mailgate.conf and see if you get more useful output when running 
> fetchmail.
> 
> Otherwise, you could have fetchmail output the retrieved message to a 
> file, which you can examine afterwards.
> 
> 
> Sebastian
> 
> -- 
> Sebastian Flothow
> sebastian at flothow.de
> 
> Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>  > Why is top posting frowned upon?
>