On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 03:18:15PM -0800, Professional Software
Engineering wrote:
At 22:53 2003-03-28 +0100, Dallman Ross did say:
There is *no* reason to be loading that humongo perl thing into
memory for each message he gets.
Agreed, though for _selected_ pieces of mail, it wouldn't necessarily
be as evil as you make it out to be. However, people should always
benchmark the tools which they decide to use. Awk for instance is a
major pig. I don't even think Perl holds a candle to it in terms of
resource consumption, esp. when you consider the functionality of the
two languages.
But we don't need it, or perl. (Though if we did, we would want the
w and h flags on the recipe.)
:0 b # forward just the body
* ^From:(_dot_)*(_at_)bio\(_dot_)ri\(_dot_)ccf\(_dot_)org
! forward(_at_)address
But, uhm, if I understood the original post correctly, he's not
talking about having the host that procmail is running on perform
the forward - his "Groupwise" mail server is where the mail arrives
and from which he forwards to his *nix box where he has procmail.
GROUPWISE is apparently adding a new set of headers (and if I've
understood a followup message correctly), quoting the original
headers, perhaps "OutBreak style" within the body (i.e. not actually
"quoted" with any indentation symbols).
Okay, well, I suspect I had as much trouble understanding his original
post as you did. Since "headers" seems to mean something different
to him than to the rest of us, and since his second post about it
only made it more confusing to me, not less, I give up. Suggest
to the OP that he give examples of what his mail looks like before
he tries to change it, and what he wants it to look like afterward.
If true, it would seem to indicate that the headers should simply
be discarded and the body re-applied as the new _complete_ message
(much in the manner that your forward recipe above is forwarding
the body only), but I'm going to wait until the actual before and
after is explained. There is of course the added issue of dealing
with MIME constructs, and how this Groupwise forward may mangle them
(which perhaps changes the mime separators, which should be paid close
attention to).
Ultimatley, the better solution would be to drop the groupwise server
as a clusterbomb on some desert country which has been in the news,
sending their technology back 30 years when they decide to employ it.
One thing I hate about Groupwise is that read notifications give
absolutely no clue in the headers that that's what it is, so one has
to check the message bodies of all fscking mail on the off chance that
once in a blue moon some message of that lot will turn out to be a read
notification from a Groupwise server. Ugh!
--
dman
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail