At 15:36 2002-07-03 -0700, Bart Schaefer did say:
> BODY=|`formail -I ""`
Er, no. Either
BODY=|formail -I ""
Because if you do it all on it's own someplace, procmail might give you:
procmail: Assigning "BODY=|formail"
procmail: Skipped "-I """
If you're going to do this, then you have to do it from within a recipe,
not standalone:
:0
BODY=|formail -I ""
As I provided it, you could invoke it standalone within the rcfile - no
delivery implied.
Of course, if you have to go through the effort of invoking it within a
recipe, why go through the trouble of dealing with formail or passing
around the whole message:
:0b
BODY=|cat -
(surely that's more efficient than passing the whole message to formail,
and the invoked binary is smaller to boot)
BODY=`formail -I ""`
but not both a pipe and backticks.
Hmm, the pipe-n-backticks method seems to work fine though. And oddly, it
seems like the correct way to go about it (it demonstrates both that you're
piping the message out to the external command and assigning the output of
the program), whereas the assignment of the output of a command not
explicitly provided with any input (yea, so procmail seems to hand it over
anyway), is vague.
What is the difference in how procmail ACTUALLY invokes these two commands?
BODY=|`formail -I ""`
BODY=`formail -I ""`
Philip?
And in some recent broken versions of procmail, the variant with the pipe
can cause an out-of-memory error.
Well, broken stuff is always a problem, isn't it?
---
Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering
Procmail disclaimer: <http://www.professional.org/procmail/disclaimer.html>
Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies. I'll get my copy from the list.
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail