procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Simple recipe to move uninteresting threads in separate mailbox

2006-12-31 16:55:39
At 19:05 2006-12-31 +0100, M. Fioretti wrote:
On Sun, Dec 31, 2006 06:54:20 AM -0800, Professional Software
Engineering (PSE-L(_at_)mail(_dot_)professional(_dot_)org) wrote:

You might check my website and fetch the "sandbox" setup from there,
then run the recipe from within that to test it against _saved_
mail, like so:

Duly noted, thanks. I had already started testing "live" on another
account I only use for some, absolutely non critical, mailing lists
with separate procmailrc, but this is another nice way for sure.

Besides some common useful header extractions the sandbox setup performs, 
the setup also includes hijacking SENDMAIL to direct to a script.  The goal 
of it all is to provide for a platform which you can test a script on 
without having the hack the script to not do things you might normally be 
doing (such as autoreplies or forwards).

1) I have realized that, unlike the .procmail_ignore.mua.file, the
   formail "ignore.cache" has all items on one line:

because it is binary, with each element null terminated.

  this shouldn't be a problem (unless grep has some undocumented max
   line lenght it can't handle, does it?). Was it intended?

It's a binary file.  Grep handles binary files fine.  I'm unaware of a 
specific max line length in grep - it certainly hasn't posed a problem before.

2) I don't remember if I already posted this, but will it work with
   messages which have _both_ the I-R-T and References: headers?

I wrote it to consolodate both of these headers - that is why both headers 
are extracted and concatenated into one variable at the very top.  In your 
original discussion, you only mentioned I-R-T -- I brought up that 
References should be included.  I opted to consolodate the two rather than 
expect one OR the other, since a few (very few) messages do have both.

3) I keep having the "Extraneous locallockfile ignored" warning in the
   procmail log. Here is one complete run of that recipe. What does it
   mean? Is it an error?

You're not running the last version of the recipe which I sent to this 
list, where I addressed this.

---
  Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering

  Procmail disclaimer: <http://www.professional.org/procmail/disclaimer.html>
  Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies.  I'll get my copy from the list.


____________________________________________________________
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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>