At 11:43 AM 5.22.2004 +0200, Dallman Ross wrote:
From: "Kai Schaetzl" <maillists(_at_)conactive(_dot_)com>
Jack L. Stone wrote on Fri, 21 May 2004 10:12:54 -0500:
/usr/local/bin/formail:${PATH} <=== this path add solved
it. Cannot be found without it.
I think you are misinterpreting something. The above is the path to
the formail binary, correct? So, it cannot help here at all. Change it
to /usr/local/bin and the next one will probably not be necessary.
FORMAIL="/usr/local/bin/formail"
*This* is the one which makes it work for you at the moment.
I thought the same thing, and started to write it, and then
deleted my paragraph after I did an experiment. I put this in
my shell (tcsh) path:
/usr/local/subversion-1.0.3/bin/svn
"svn" is a binary. The "subversion" thing is not normally in
my path. (And the program set was added to the system yesterday.)
Anyway, it does work. Typing "svn" gets me the binary.
Otoh, I agree that Jack never showed the raw command "formail" in
his rc after that point, but always used "$FORMAIL", so you are
right that that is the one that made it work for him. But
the other does work to allow him to use formail, interestingly.
--
dman
As a follow-up, if you looked at my includes, you will see the raw formail
used there. They would not work without adding formail to the path.
Now, lastly, I replaced $FORMAIL with just "formail" also in my procmailrc
and it works just fine now too -- as one ought to expect.
Only question would be "which is more efficient?.....$FORMAIL or just
formail with path-add."
Best regards,
Jack L. Stone,
Administrator
Sage American
http://www.sage-american.com
jacks(_at_)sage-american(_dot_)com
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail