Matt wrote,
| I'd like to test out the latest version. However, I have a problem. I
| don't have root access to the machine where I get my mail and the
| sysadmin won't upgrade.
That wouldn't be a problem (never has been for me) except for what you told
us next:
| Also, the .forward file doesn't work.
So procmail is the integrated LDA (good) but it overrides a .forward? Bummer.
| So I'm thinking my only other option is to invoke procmail 3.21 from the
| .procmailrc file. Does that make sense?
Perfect sense.
| Would something like this work? I'm not sure how others beta test
| procmail.
|
| %> cat .procmailrc
| # pipe all mail through latest version
| LATEST=/path/to/procmail-3.21/procmail
| :0
| | $LATEST -Yf -d $USERNAME -m .procmailrc-3.21
First, I think you meant -Yf-, not -Yf (-f needs an argument); second,
unless your sysadmin defines it in /etc/procmailrc, $USERNAME is not what
you would need but rather $LOGNAME, except that, since procmail has already
dropped privileges by that point and is running as you, you don't need the
-d option at all; third, you probably would NOT want to use the -m option,
since it will unset $ORGMAIL and remove the built-in failsafe provision for
times when you aren't using procmail as an in-line filter.
All told, here's how I'd do it; instead of using two rcfiles (it's very
similar to what I just advised Jill!) just start your .procmailrc like this:
:0 # recurse if version is earlier than 3.21 and we haven't already recursed
* ! RECURSED ?? on
* PROCMAIL_VERSION ?? ^^\/[0-9.]*
* $ -${MATCH:-0}^0
* 3.21^0
| /path/to/current_version/procmail RECURSED=on
rest_of_your_recipes_go_here
Yes, the trailing asterisk instead of a plus sign in the extraction is inten-
tional. If it's so old a version of procmail that the PROCMAIL_VERSION vari-
able didn't exist yet, we want to match on the condition and set MATCH="".
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail