Sending mail fails silently

Sending mail fails silently

[Michiel Buddingh]

Hello, I've been trying to configure gnus to take care of
my mail. (remote IMAP/authenticated SMTP)

However, mail I send from gnus does not seem to reach its
destination.  Is there any way I can coax gnus/smtpmail
into being more verbose about the process, so I can try to
isolate the problem?

cheers,
Michiel

Re: Sending mail fails silently

[Michiel Buddingh]

Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org> writes:
> (setq smtpmail-debug-info t)
>
> shows the trace of the SMTP session.  You can see it in the
> buffer named "*trace of SMTP session to XXX*".

Doesn't seem to work.  Perhaps it only gives a trace if the
server actually rejects the mail?

> By the way, smtpmail.el containd in Emacs 21.3 doesn't support
> the authenticated SMTP as far as I know.

Sounds like that may well be the problem.  Is it possible to
graft a newer smtpmail.el on Emacs 21.3, or should I upgrade?

cheers,
Michiel

Re: Sending mail fails silently

[Katsumi Yamaoka]

>>>>> In <86r7n860ew.fsf@t-91-39.athome.tue.nl> Michiel Buddingh wrote:

> Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org> writes:
>> (setq smtpmail-debug-info t)
>>
>> shows the trace of the SMTP session.  You can see it in the
>> buffer named "*trace of SMTP session to XXX*".

> Doesn't seem to work.  Perhaps it only gives a trace if the
> server actually rejects the mail?

The buffer is generated regardless of failure or a success.
Please note, the buffer name begins and ends with asterisks.
They are apt to disappear in the Gnus article buffer because of
the `gnus-treat-emphasize' variable.

>> By the way, smtpmail.el containd in Emacs 21.3 doesn't support
>> the authenticated SMTP as far as I know.

> Sounds like that may well be the problem.  Is it possible to
> graft a newer smtpmail.el on Emacs 21.3, or should I upgrade?

The version of Emacs containing the new smtpmail.el has not been
released yet.  If you don't care about a risk, please use this:

ftp://ftp.jpl.org/pub/tmp/smtpmail.el
or http://www.jpl.org/ftp/pub/tmp/smtpmail.el

Re: Sending mail fails silently

[Michiel Buddingh]

Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> writes:
> Can't that be handled through an .authinfo file?  My ISPs NNTP server
> requires authorization and eventually so will the SMTP server.  My
> .authinfo contains:
>
> machine news.iphouse.com login timmcn@bitstream.net password xxxxxxxxx
>
> and I assume the syntax for SMTP would be similar

How would the authinfo file help if smtpmail.el doesn't know how to
do authentication?

cheers,
Michiel

Re: Sending mail fails silently

[Tim McNamara]

Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org> writes:

>>>>>> In <m24qk4gxxv.fsf@Stella-Blue.local> Tim McNamara wrote:
>
>> Can't that be handled through an .authinfo file?  My ISPs NNTP
>> server requires authorization and eventually so will the SMTP
>> server.
>
> The latest smtpmail should support the ~/.authinfo file.  Make sure
> the value for the `smtpmail-auth-credentials' variable is
> "~/.authinfo" after loading smtpmail.elc.
>
>> My .authinfo contains:
>
>> machine news.iphouse.com login timmcn@bitstream.net password
>> xxxxxxxxx
>
>> and I assume the syntax for SMTP would be similar, perhaps:
>
>> machine smtp.iphouse.com login timmcn@bitstream.net pasword
>> xxxxxxxx
>
> It seems no problem except for `pasword'.  It's a typo of
> `password', isn't it? ;-) By the way, is `timmcn@bitstream.net' a
> valid login name?  It might have to be a shell login name.

Yes, "pasword" was a typo that I didn't catch (one sadly of many,
which has caused some consternation a few times with my .emacs and
.gnus files- Lisp isn't very idiot-tolerant).

In the case of my ISP, they are usiing e-mail addresses rather than
shell login names.

>> This of course presumes the OP is running a Unix-type system.  If
>> he's running Emacs under Windows or Mac OS 9, I wouldn't know what
>> could be done about that.
>
> smtpmail.el mentions another usage of `smtpmail-auth-credentials'.
> For example:
>
> (setq smtpmail-auth-credentials
>       '(("smtp.iphouse.com" 25 "timmcn@bitstream.net" "xxxxxxxx")))

Ah, excellent!  Hopefully that will help the OP as well.