On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, David W. Tamkin wrote:
wotan(_at_)netcom(_dot_)com wrote,
| FROM=`$FORMAIL -zrx To:`
| SENDER=`echo $FROM | sed -e 's/@.*//'`
You could do the second step within procmail and save overhead:
:0
* FROM ?? ^^\/[^(_at_)]+
{ SENDER=$MATCH }
| I do not have any form of nws in my FOLKS listing ...
Well, I ansered both of my questions. David's rc does not give the same
value for $SENDER. Which makes it less useful for too me, since it
doesn't use the reply-to address.
And that was what I missed about the spam. The Reply-to was set to
no(_at_)spam(_dot_)com(_dot_)
I put David's rc into my procmailrc when I before running the spam through
again, using SENDER1 instead of SENDER.
$SENDER1 was set to nws. $SENDER was set to no. And I do have a two
addresses in my FOLKS listing that begin no.
--
The gentlemen looked one another over with microscopic carelessness.