At 4:26 PM EDT on April 19 John Iverson sent off: > * On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Rob Reid wrote: > > > Return-Path works (for now anyway) and is "cheaper" than ^TO. > > My understanding is that some people prefer ^TO or ^TO_ to handle > mail sent to both the list their personal address
Ah. I'm not one of those people. At 9:37 PM EDT on April 19 s. keeling sent off: > Incoming from Rob Reid: > > > > # Sort away mails from the mutt (mail user agent) mailing list > > :0 > > * ^Return-Path: <mutt-users-owner > > Does this actually work for you? Yep. > .. Or are you doing some formail magic of which I'm unaware? Not that I'm aware of. At 10:05 PM EDT on April 19 Dan Lowe sent off: > Previously, s. keeling wrote: > > > > Does this actually work for you? I just tested it and it doesn't for > > me, and I can find no ^Return-Path: header in your mail at least. > > The Return-Path header is added by the final delivery MTA - so whether or > not it's added to a message will vary from one person to the next I didn't know that. I'm using more or less standard Red Hat, with sendmail handing off to procmail. There's no /etc/procmailrc*, so sendmail must be doing it (and I'm not going to wade into *there*). My apologies, I thought the Return-Path was being set by the mailing list distributor. At 10:29 PM EDT on April 19 s. keeling sent off: > Incoming from Dan Lowe: > > > > The Return-Path header is added by the final delivery MTA - so whether or > > not it's added to a message will vary from one person to the next (since we > > all have our own final delivery MTAs). For instance, this message which > > I'm replying to did not have a Return-Path header (at least, not in my > > mailbox - it might have in yours). > > Exactly. It's an unreliable header. So why use it? Not really. It's perfectly reliable for me. > :0 H > * ^TO_.*@mutt.org > * ^Sender:.*owner\-mutt\-users\@mutt\.org Back to my original point, why not just use :0H: * ^Sender:.*owner\-mutt\-users\@ and catch all of the domains at once? Sven's argument about avoiding false postives doesn't really wash (unless you're on a dog sledder's list) because he will miss *new* domains if and when they are added. > Apologies to members of the list who couldn't give a flying @#$%^ > about procmail. Stuff like this really ought to go to procmail-users Well it is about the mutt lists. -- loquacity, n. A disorder which renders the sufferer unable to curb his tongue when you wish to talk. - Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary. Robert I. Reid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://astro.utoronto.ca/~reid/ PGP Key: http://astro.utoronto.ca/~reid/pgp.html
