At 10:56 PM 7/28/97 -0400, Timothy J Luoma wrote:
There was a huge amount of blank space at the end, plus the body of the
message, which we don't need. In fact, the entire thing looked like a spam
message.
It was indeed SPAM. I agree with your sentiments.
:0c
* ! ^X-forwarded-to: saroff(_at_)vs\(_dot_)lmco\(_dot_)com
[snip]
Uhm, does this do ANYTHING for the bounce message? I don't think so - see,
the X-forwarded-to header will be in the BODY of the bounce message.
Note: I think (although I am not 100% sure) that putting the standard
'duplicate-check'
:0wh: .idfile.lock
| formail -D 81920 .procmail.idfile
at the top would also help, but this is only a backup.
No, I think (though am not 100% :) ) that since the message FROM the MAILER
has it's own message ID, this won't work. Also, if it did, you wouldn't be
recording the bounce itself, which would be a bummer.
---
Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies. I'll get my copy from the list.
Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering
Post Box 2395 / San Rafael, CA 94912-2395