At 15:24 2000-07-27 -0400, jack wallen jr wrote:
:0:
* ^Subject:.*surfing.*Digest
| formail +1 -ds >>surfing
will separate the 'surfing' digest into it's individual e-mails and dump
them in the 'surfing' folder. what i'm confused about is if the name of
the digest (as it seems in this recipe) is derived from the
^Subject: line. why is this?
Uhm, presumably because the surfing digest was identified by it's subject
line. Admittedly, this particular rule is quite lame, since it'd attempt
to bust up a message like "how to I unsu*scribe from the surfing digest?",
which may have been offlisted to the user, or in fact, may be WITHIN the
burst digest. In reality, testing for list-inserted headers (like the new
"List-Id" on the procmail list), along with a sender or from makes a lot
more sense.
Just keep in mind that the example is just that - an example. It is not
meant to be a generic rule suitable for any given list or need, but instead
serves to show how one would break up a digest.
These days, more and more digests aren't even comprised of the entire
emails, but are instead extracted bodies with the briefest of (non-RFC)
headers for separators and indentification. I very much doubt such that
the formail digest bursting function would work very well in those situations.
I trust you're not subscribed to the Surfing Digest?
---
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
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail