On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 10:25:12PM -0500, Michael D Schleif wrote:
Dallman Ross <dman(_at_)nomotek(_dot_)com> [2003:09:26:01:45:12+0200] scribed:
Just the procmail list.
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
Oh, I had thought you were subscribed. Maybe you're not? (How'd
you find my file?)
Subscribing is a bit tough, because the email address that you get
from running "procmail -v" on the command line isn't any good. But
I can't remember the address to subscribe! The above works for list
members, but subscribing first is the key. Hmm. Check out Nancy
McGough's pages (I sent you the URL earlier) and see, okay? I'd
take this further, but I'm in Germany and it's nearly 2 a.m.
In the headers to your post, I found this:
List-Subscribe:
<http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail>,
<mailto:procmail-request(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE?subject=subscribe>
Thanks very much, Michael. After two years of list-address brokenness,
I really wish somebody would fix the advertised (procmail -v) addresses.
It may have dawned on some that my message read a little strange.
That's because I didn't really mean to cc. the list. But it's
fine that I did, because the outcome is a reminder to look in
the headers.
The reason for the inadvertent cc. is twofold. First, I wanted
to see what address I send stuff to, to this list. I was not logged
on to my shell account. I had Outlook (yes, I use Outlook) open,
so I typed "procmail" in the Cc: header to get Outlook to expand
the address for me, so I could copy-and-paste it below. But
because I was in a hurry to shut down my computer and go to bed
(I was very tired, and anyway, Heike has given me a 2 a.m. curfew
to stop my playing and come spend at least four hours curled in
an unconscious state next to her until she gets up for work) :-) :-) ,
I then forgot to delete the procmail address from the Cc: field.
Ah, well. All's fair in love and war, eh?
If I hadn't been so tired, and in such a hurry, I probably would have
noticed the headers again myself. But, really, this whole address
thing is by now more than ridiculous, isn't it? Let's get it fixed.
My correspondent's problem is worth discussing here. I had thought
he'd read about my virussnag.rc file on this list, since he sent
me a problem report. At first I asked him to write the list (figuring
he knew *which* list). It turns out he found my file by Googling.
I was intrigued by his problem report enough to waste some time
trying to figure out why my file wasn't stopping some of his viruses.
I'll cut to the chase here, to say that my file works for him when
he runs it on the command line, e.g., --
procmail VERBOSE=y ~/.procmail/subs/virussnag.rc < some.message
But when he calls virussnag.rc from his .procmailrc with an INCLUDERC,
it doesn't work as it should. The Content-Type: field never matches,
so the first virus-snagging recipe bails. Now, what would cause such
behavior? I can't think of what it might be. I saw verbose logs
from the user of the CTYPE variable in my file failing to match.
Wtf? Any ideas? Here is that part of my file. Yes, $WS was
defined for him in his logs:
CTYPE
:0 # save the value of Content-Type:
* $ ^Content-Type:.*\/[^$WS][^;]+
{ CTYPE = $MATCH }
I suggested to the user as a first try that he should keep moving
the INCLUDERC up in his .procmailrc until it works -- if it ever
does. I'll look forward to his troubleshooting reports.
--
dman
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail