procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Procmail suggestion for ! recipe action

1995-12-18 16:46:13
Stephen R. van den Berg writes on 18 December 1995 at 21:50:01
Sten Drescher <stend(_at_)cris(_dot_)com> wrote:
SRvdB> 1. This is a non-trivial operation to be done by procmail itself
SRvdB> (code bloat alert).
[...]
SRvdB> 2. It is a trivial operation for formail.

     So?

So it should be done by a tool like formail.  And since we want to avoid
duplicating effort, this effectively bans the functionality from most other
[...]
What if the Resent-* fields are already there?  There are too many decisions
that need to be made before adding those fields.  The only way to give the

I agree with this reasoning, but it sure would be nice if it was
easier to add Resent-* headers.  Right now you have to replace a
single '!' with something along the lines of
   | formail -b \
        -i"Resent-To: xxx" \
   | $(SENDMAIL) -t -oi xxx
I got so tired of doing that (and you probably want to add several
more headers as well, such as a 4-digit Resent-Date: and Errors-To:)
that I put it all into a shell script.

So procmail itself isn't the right tool; doing it in formail is
straight-forward, although somewhat cumbersome.  Is there a better
alternative than my "resend-message" script?

   Dan
--------------------- message is author's opinion only --------------------
J. Daniel Smith <DanS(_at_)bristol(_dot_)com>              
http://www.bristol.com/~dan
Bristol Technology Inc.                     +1 203 438 6969, 438-5013 (FAX)
Ridgefield, Connecticut (USA)                       
{info,jobs}(_at_)bristol(_dot_)com
                                 --------
Von guten Maechten wunderbar geborgen, erwarten wir getrost, was
kommen mag.  Gott ist mit uns am Abend und am Morgen, und ganz gewiss
an jedem neuen Tag.  - Dietrich Bonhoeffer