procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: checking against blacklist

2002-09-29 09:49:17
Am Sonntag, 29. September 2002 16:08 schrieb Dallman Ross:
Axel Heinrici wrote:


You can do this same thing totally within procmail, e.g.:
  :0 hic:  # caret, space and tab are in brackets below

  * ! ^In-Reply-To:.*[^   ]
  *   ^Subect:(.*\<)?Re:
  *   ^Message-ID:.*<\/[^>]+

  | echo $MATCH >> .falscheReplies

I am more familiar with awk then with procmail. So, this will
be nicer and probably faster, but it doesn't fix my problem.:-(..

Well, I think it probably helps the first part of your setup. . .

I implemented this now. What do I have to put into the brackets in the 
"* ! ^In-Reply-To:.*[^  ]"-line. This is not clear to me. I tried it 
this way:
"* ! ^In-Reply-To:..." so the line is not allowed to be empty after the 
":"


If you are going to check the same list right here, what will
have stopped a race condition such that the above action will
already have completed and you'll get a match on the very same
mail?

This is OK in my oppinion.

Yes, I wasn't paying close attention.  The condition you have for
no In-Reply-To: stuff to be parsed will handle this fine.

The rest of your proposal is a mess; unfortunately, I didn't
save the posted reply to Sean that showed your current version.

A mess? Hm. 
I'll try to explain more clear. I hope you will still help me.
This is the dubious set of the two recipes: 

:0 Whc:
| egrep  -f .falscheReplies
|egrep -E Message-ID: |awk -F " " '{print $2}' >>.falscheReplies

:0 Wh:
| egrep  -f .falscheReplies
listen-reste/

I think I got the problem now. *clap my hand at my forehead*
The message ID alone is not the correct regexp to match the mail.:-)
I will have to do this a little more clever.
The best idea is probably to do this in a separate script. 
Or is there something implemented in procmail to read files?


One more question:
return-code=0 tells procmail to use the action line in current recipe
return-code=1 tells procmail to skip current recipe

right?

p.s. your mail does not contain an "In-Reply-To:" in the header.
Why?

Why do you think it should?

Many people view there mail folders sortet by threads. Missing 
"In-Reply-To:" in the header destroys this threading. There are 
mailinglists with more then 200 mails per day. Correct threading is 
essential there.

greetings 
        Axel
_______________________________________________
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>