| Thu 97-10-23 Philip Guenther <guenther(_at_)gac(_dot_)edu> list.procmail
| >o What does lonely "f" flag mean. Shouldn't it be better to force
| > to say if h and/or b is wanted?
| ...I would suggest that
| your lint give a warning unless the 'h' or 'b' flags or both were
| supplied. That way if someone really does want to feed the entire message
| into the filter they can profess so by saying "fhb".
Done. v1.24 now available.
| I would suggest that almost every | action should have the 'w' flag.
| Perhaps someone would tell your lint not to complain about this by prefacing
| the recipe with:
| # ignore exit code
Exellent suggestion. I had forgotten that. Now there lint directives
are supported. To ignore the "w" flag test, you must say explicitely
"-w" in the previous receipe start line. Any more Directives I could
# Lint: -w
| >o If formail -D is used; should it always have W flag?
| I _think_ that if formail -D is the action (not a condition), then the
| 'W' flag is sensically required.
Ok. It check this allright.
| >o Can Lint suggest "i" flag for receipe?
| > :0 fbw
| > | mimencode -u -q
| Hmm, I think a filter should almost never have the 'i' flag. The above
| recipe certainly shouldn't.
Sorry. Bad example. I mean "If there is no f flag in the receipe start
and if there is '|' then suggest i flag.". Should it also check. "AND
no formail in '|' action line". How's that?