[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LINEBUF questions

2001-08-25 08:26:33
Don followed up,

| Repeating the recipe just above with LINEBUF=4096, then immediately
| resetting LINEBUF=2048, still allows me to use LONGVAR in later recipes.
| I did confirm that the buffer was reset to the smaller size, and
| following it with a condition like * LONGVAR ?? x^^ works fine. That
| surprised me a little, but nicely. In fact, matching it against
| something on the right side that complains "Excessive output
| quenched..." still works too.

I believe that Philip has posted in the past that the search area doesn't
have to fit into LINEBUF.

| Finally, something like:
| :0 w
| LONGVAR=|formail -zx To:
| avoids the whole LINEBUF issue entirely. I saw this in one of Philip's
| messages in the list archive but didn't see it in the man pages. So out
| of curiosity, as someone who is conscientious about avoiding unnecessary
| resource use, which poison whould you choose?  The extra formail
| process, or the temporary increase to LINEBUF?  (Or don't care?)

Hmm.  Not my area.  Certainly if there were no other formail calls going on
and formail had to be loaded just for that, there would be less overhead in
resetting LINEBUF.  Otherwise, I really don't know.

| Thanks again for the help.

De nada.

procmail mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>