in message <200208201249(_dot_)g7KCnQw27324(_at_)panix2(_dot_)panix(_dot_)com>,
wrote dman(_at_)nomotek(_dot_)com thusly...
[ObDigression: skip reading this if you have no interest in Bourne-
shell scripting.]
From: parv <parv_fm(_at_)emailgroups(_dot_)net>
i almost missed the back-quotes. if "$()" construct had been used
instead, i wouldn't have to re-read 4-5 times just to reconcile the
interaction between "[" (test) & the external commands.
True (and the original is admittedly messy to the point of being
creepy); but not all sh's understand $().
true...
#!/bin/sh
PATH=/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin
{ ifile -q -v 0 | grep -q '^spam' ; } && exit 0
exit 1
I have no idea what ifile is;
neither do i...
Assuming a POSIX-compatible grep (see "man grep" for cautions
about the -s and -q flags), how about
yeah, i was alluding to the same warnings when i mentioned "gnu"
& "grep" in the same sentence...
{ ifile -q -v 0 | grep -qs '^spam' ; } || exit 1
...even better. all i can say, i was in the zone... tunnel vision
zone that is.
So why do we need a script?
:0 flags
* ? ifile -q -v 0 | grep -qs '^spam'
{ your action on success }
'cause it's so much fun! :)
i don't know; only OP can answer that.
- parv
--
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail