Professional Software Engineering wrote:
At 20:01 2009-11-16 -0500, R A Lichtensteiger wrote:
:0 Whc: vacation.lock # Put the email address in a cache file
| formail -rD 8192 $PROCS/.vacation.cache
:0 ehc
[insert sending recipe here]
formail's barely documented trick of caching from_ addresses instead
of Message-IDs.
That may be so, but it doesn't appear to actively do anything to avoid
sending vacation messages to LISTS.
Very true. I was pointing out an alternative way to cache sender
addresses that takes less effort and fits how things are cached in
procmail/formail already.
Filtering out list addresses is obvious and in your earlier recipe, so
I didn't bother. If we're grading on completeness of the response:
http://www.tifosi.com/rali/Procmail/vacation.rc
(the multiple echos are ass and I would probably cat a file through sed
to set the variable parts of the message if I were to write the script
again.)
I prefer to determine what address I'm supposed to be sending the message
to and using THAT address to determine if I've already sent a message to
it. the from_ address isn't necessarily the same address to which a reply
will go.
Clearly. But it (will|ought to) be consistent for any sender x(_at_)y(_dot_)z
It seems ... more straightforward ... to ask "have I seen this sender
before?" than to ask "have I sent my vacation announcement to this
address?" but to each his own.
Reto
--
R A Lichtensteiger rali(_at_)tifosi(_dot_)com
"If you go through the pearly gates backwards in a fireball,
that's a cool way to die"
- Jeremy Clarkson, Top Gear
____________________________________________________________
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