-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hi Robert! I'm a UNIX administrator, spamfighter, and a virusfighter!
Is it faster to put a INCLUDERC where I'd otherwise put the actual contents
of the recipe?
:0
*^^TOlow-traffic(_at_)mailinglist(_dot_)com
{
INCLUDERC=foo.proc
}
IMHO, that seems silly, as you would have to look at another file
to see the conditions of the recipe. Why not group your various recipes
in seperate rc files and have your .procmailrc consist only of include
statements. Here's mine as an example:
# include my mailing list rc file
INCLUDERC=$PMDIR/rc-lists
# include my spam list rc file
INCLUDERC=$PMDIR/rc-spam.list
# include personal rc file
INCLUDERC=$PMDIR/rc-personal
# uncomment for testing new recipes
#INCLUDERC=$PMDIR/rc-test
My rc files are grouped by the category, with misc stuff in rc-personal.
rc-test I use when testing a new recipe. If I get a mail loop, I just
comment the INCLUDERC back out.
Hope this helps,
- --
<Doug Muth> ----- <http://www.ot.com/~dmuth> ---- Est sularus oth Mithas!
Co-author of the SPAM-L FAQ -=-=-= http://www.snowpoint.com/spam-lfaq.txt
Anti-virus software and utils -=-=-=-=-=-= http://www.ot.com/~dmuth/virus
Because the only GOOD spammer is a DEAD spammer! || http://spam.abuse.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Send a blank e-mail to dmuth+help(_at_)ot(_dot_)com for my public key
iQCVAwUBMzwBDx0LJlIsPN1JAQEDEAP+Kz1XlF5aFOABWyfdZJ2PzIr2sSob7R+o
r1agWfGOE/a5qx8VEa4FSbCTEhfdKihXDd/n3m54Vq4eooLrb/J9ssLejvFTqd+1
qqvmoXDNcSp9FMZcY37Ho1y0hw7DR5t/UyXKie2TO10GImIdnX82hTv9mCflw9RZ
veEEDpjvXGM=
=4EJZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----