[Five posts that I sent in the last week of December never appeared on the
list. I'm resending them today. This is the first of the five.
I note that all five were addresed to procmail-users(_at_)procmail(_dot_)org
and none
of them to procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)rwth-aachen(_dot_)de; maybe that's the
problem. I
don't know how those that did appear were addressed, as I deleted my sent-
folder copies when they showed up as list distributions.]
Steve Sykes wrote,
| I found this block in my log file. The program using it is the
| Spambouncer. It is unmodified for the origninal program so I don't know
| why it gets this error. It does send the bounce message out so it does
| the cat fine, so I don't know what else it would be writing.
| procmail: Error while writing to " (${FORMAIL} -rt \
| -I"From: ${ALTFROM}" \
| -A"X-Loop: ${NOLOOP}";\
| cat ${SBDIR}/notify;\
| echo " ********** The password is ${BYPASSWD}. **********";\
| echo " ";\
| echo "=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=";\
| echo " ";\
| cat blocktemp.${BLOCKPID};\
| ${RM} -f blocktemp.${BLOCKPID}) \
| | ${SENDMAIL} -oi -t"
The error is not about formail's or cat's attempt to write to the pipe to
$SENDMAIL but rather about procmail's attempt to write the message text to
the entire command string.
You didn't quote the recipe, but I'd guess it has neither the `i' flag nor
the `h' flag and, as we can see, it invokes formail without the -k option.
Thus procmail is trying to feed the entire message to the action line, but
formail wants only the head, and echo and cat want no text from the message
at all. Thus procmail can't write the whole body to the action, and it
complains.
The `i' flag on the recipe would tell procmail not to care about write
errors; the `h' flag would tell procmail to feed only the head to the
action; formail's -k option would make formail use the entire message text.
Either of those will get rid of the error message, but we do care if the
head doesn't get written properly, and you don't want to include the body in
the returned error notice, so neither of those is what we want for this
particular instance. My recommendation is to add the `h' flag to the
recipe.
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail