> > fcc-save-hook (.*adsl.*@(lists.|)unixathome.org) =adsl-List > > fcc-save-hook '~f [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~s adsl' =adsl-List > > fcc-save-hook '~t [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~s adsl' =adsl-List > > hmm... - does this list rewrite the sender > thus sending all mails as "From: majordomo"? > in that case replace the maillist software!
There's nothing wrong with the maillist software (majordomo). Line 1 catches list emails and my postings to the list, lines 2 and 3 administrative emails from+to the list server software. > however, if there is a special address for the distribution > (like usual) then it should be as simple as this: > > fcc-save-hook '~C [EMAIL PROTECTED]' =ADSL As to my experience (with procmail filtering), it is unreliable to expect that the send-msg-to-list address appears in To: or Cc:. > But if you just want so save *some* mails from the list > which happen to have "adsl" in the Subject line No, just keeping each list in its own file. > mutt is no replacement for procmail. > if your problem is with procmail > then you should be posting elsewhere. I never have problems with procmail, just with dumb MUAs... :) I do however require any MUA to function flawlessly in combination with procmail. The MUA doesn't get it until procmail is finished. With me anyway. > there's fcc-hook and fcc-save-hook and with header editing > you can also use your editor's feature to adjust the Fcc. > have you tried these? Yes, hence my question. Editing the headers with the msg each time isn't so great (dumb repetive things are best left to a silicon box). > besides, when you have "set save_name" then mails > sent to listname@domain get saved in +listname. > and if you need a different name for +listname, > well, there's "ln -s" to create symlinks! Hell no, what a pollution in my mail directory tree! Remember: some dozen lists. > > Don't you think it is a common sense to save a copy of outgoing message > > to the *same* folder as you are reading from? > Not really, too much clutter. I prefer to have a special "sent messages" > folder. I find it easier to remove the sent msg from the list file once my copy arrives then to remove it from a common outbox file. It's useful to keep a copy for the time being because some mail servers can be dodgy at times. And, as David T-G says, for personal communication an fcc to the currently read mail file is preferable. Everybody works differently, perhaps another config option? > It's already pretty easy. Make a script something like this: [...] May work, but isn't that rather a cludge? It's surely not so user-friendly. > % It requires a folder-hook for each list - blerrg. > > Well, that's not so bad; after all, mutt can parse them for you and you > never have to know. I'd just source a script that scans all of my > incoming folders (especially since they're named to be easy to recognize) > and let it do the work. Not too bad an idea, though I'm not sure whether I really want to name my list folders with the list-post-address. Not really actually. Me thinks it's easier to use a line like the first of those 3 I gave, for each list. Extra work is required for list administrative emails, fortunately that doesn't happen too often. I much prefer listname-request@domain addresses over majordomo@domain for this reason (covered by the first pattern already), but somehow I don't think people will ditch theit 'domos for this reason... > % One could use an fcc-save-hook for each list, which is a pain, and > % the patterns become humangous fast. > > Not a problem. No, not for mutt, but for me, as I have to maintain them, which costs time. On the other hand, perhaps it would be better to shift the problem towards procmail, for which I maintain patterns anyway. Thanks all for the suggestions! Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann, list0570 at paradise dot net dot nz http://volker.orcon.net.nz/
