On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:08:11PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Ean Schuessler wrote: > > Can we just generate that procmail file or at least the section in > > question? > > Not easily, no.
It's difficult to imagine this presenting a problem. Procmail reads on-disk config on each invocation - it doesn't run as a daemon - and it's trivial to include additional rules files. To wit, INCLUDERC=$HOME/some_esoteric_path/procmail_rules/spam-sources INCLUDERC=$HOME/some_esoteric_path/procmail_rules/coc-violators etc. The code that installs a new version oc coc-violators can doubtless jump through arbitrary hoops to minimize any sort of race - swapping in a newly generated file will be awfully close to atomic in any case. The source for such a file could be as simple as a terminate date and an email address, or it might also include a pointer to the documented CoC abuse. Of course, procmail isn't forgiving in the face of syntax errors, so using an automated tool to help generate correct files can only be a good thing. If the listmaster workload is such that it's not feasible to implement reasonable limits for ban periods using existing mechanisms, then I imagine such a tool would be welcome. I'll be happy to volunteer time to help implement it, although I have no doubt that Ean is way ahead of me here. -- The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which. - G. Orwell -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140922221116.gl16...@blisses.org
