Justin Gombos <mindfuq(_at_)zianet(_dot_)com> writes:
What might such a rule look like. I don't really understand the
role of (:0:) lock operator. If I need that in this case or what.
At a minimum, you need to lock every rule that delivers to an mbox
file.
Not being argumentative here but just curios. Above you are saying
all my regular rules that write to mbox files should have the lock
right?
Even where, as is mostly the case in my setup, a rule writes to a
unique mbox file. Nothing else writes to it. Well, only gnus reads
when it slurps from them and I guess zeros them out somehow.
Reason I ask is that I've almost never used a lock operator and have
been using procmail for splitting for several years. My splitting is
pretty basic but I do have up to 100 rules at times. I don't recall
ever having locked any of them. That is what provoked my question now
since I'll be writing to the same mbox file from multiple rules.
Currently `grep \:0 ~/.procmailrc|wc -l' shows
85 rules.
My setup is: Linux (Fedora) on pc hardware. My procmailrc processes
only a light load, maybe some 700 t0 1700 hundred messages a week.
Mostly lists and a couple dozen spam traps.
I wonder if I'm skating on thin ice or just have never noticed the
problems it is causing. I've noticed nothing that seemed related to
locking those files.
What would such a problem look like?
____________________________________________________________
procmail mailing list Procmail homepage: http://www.procmail.org/
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail