procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: reply-to list-address

2002-03-22 11:04:26
On 21 Mar, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
| [...]
| 
| Is there a better way? Small recipes like:
| 
|   :0:
|   * ^X-XS4ALL-SPAM-Warning:
|   $SPAMFILE.xs4
| 
| I had (to add Logging) to change to:
| 
|   :0
|   * ^X-XS4ALL-SPAM-Warning:
|   {
|     LOG="--> spam.xs4"$NL
|     :0:
|     $SPAMFILE.xs4
|   }
| 
| This does not work:
| #  :0:
| #  * ^X-XS4ALL-SPAM-Warning:
| #  {
| #    LOG="--> spam.xs4"$NL
| #    $SPAMFILE.xs4
| #  }
| 
| Would the following work?
| #  :0:
| #  * ^X-XS4ALL-SPAM-Warning:
| #  { LOG="--> spam.xs4"$NL }
| #  $SPAMFILE.xs4
| 

This question was lost in the Reply-To: discussion, I think.

The last one will emit a "Skipped "$SPAMFILE.xs4"" message in the log.
I'm not sure you would consider this an improvement over your working
example above, but this should work.

:0
* ^X-XS4ALL-SPAM-Warning:
{ LOG="--> spam.xs4"$NL }
:0 A:
$SPAMFILE.xs4

I suppose it just depends on which you think looks cleaner.

-- 
Reply to list please, or append "6" to "procmail" in address if you must.
Spammers' unrelenting address harvesting forces me to this...reluctantly.


_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail

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