> There's another option, of course:
>
>fetchmail -> exim
>
> ...no procmail. I've never seen the need to use it. All I want to do
> in the way of filtering, sorting, spam-tagging, stripping the adverts
> out of yahoo list mail, etc, I can accomplish with exim's filter
> facilities and the
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 03:29:12PM -0400, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
> (FYI, FWIW) I do have one way of implementing such a kludge
> (system-wide) documented at
> http://dman13.dyndns.org/~dman/config_docs/exim-spamassassin
Oh, I like that. Thanks! (BTW I get 403 "Access forbidden" on the
li
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 10:53:24PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 03:22:33AM +0200, Carel Fellinger wrote:
...
> > but then the Envelop/Deliverd-TO header got mangled at my IPS and hence
> > meaningless:(, and now I've to rely on (incomplete) Received headers.
>
> Can't yo
--VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 03:22:33AM +0200, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 12:12:28AM -0500, Michael D Schleif wrote:
> > ...Of course, I need some
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 12:12:28AM -0500, Michael D Schleif wrote:
> ...Of course, I need something to act as MTA; but, what I am
> unclear about is that which exim contributes as LDA that cannot --
> readily -- be accomplished via procmail. What are reasons to continue
> to use exim -- or equival
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 02:56:37PM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
| On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 12:57:59AM -0400, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
| > procmail can do things that exim can't (for example, changing a
| > message via a filter, such as spamassassin, and then making delivery
| > decisions based on the ex
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 12:57:59AM -0400, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
> procmail can do things that exim can't (for example, changing a
> message via a filter, such as spamassassin, and then making delivery
> decisions based on the external program's output).
With apologies for contradicting the
Derrick 'dman' Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003:08:18:00:57:59-0400] scribed:
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 08:22:52PM -0500, Michael D Schleif wrote:
> [...]
>
> | There must be something that exim can/does do that procmail cannot?
>
> exim is an MTA (Mail Transfer Agent) that also includes an LDA (
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 08:22:52PM -0500, Michael D Schleif wrote:
[...]
| There must be something that exim can/does do that procmail cannot?
exim is an MTA (Mail Transfer Agent) that also includes an LDA (Local
Delivery Agent).
procmail is an LDA.
exim does a lot that procmail can't do, and p
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 09:56:15PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 08:22:52PM -0500, Michael D Schleif wrote:
> > You know, I've been wondering about this for quite sometime.
> >
> > What are the tradeoffs between these two scenarios?
> >
> >fetchmail -> exim -> procma
--7AUc2qLy4jB3hD7Z
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 08:22:52PM -0500, Michael D Schleif wrote:
> You know, I've been wondering about this for quite sometime.
>=20
> What are the tradeoffs bet
Bijan Soleymani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003:08:15:19:15:29-0400] scribed:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 09:59:27PM -0700, Michael Epting wrote:
> > I haven't changed any configuration files and I don't see any new
> > fetchmail bugs, but I'm having big problems the last few days.
> >
> > Sid, fetchmail,
--dDRMvlgZJXvWKvBx
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 09:59:27PM -0700, Michael Epting wrote:
> I haven't changed any configuration files and I don't see any new
> fetchmail bugs, but I'm havin
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 07:51:05AM -0700, Michael Epting wrote:
| On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 06:42:08AM -0400, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
| >
| > This is exim's response to fetchmail. You have exim's syntax checking
| > turned on, so it will reject any incoming message which is
| > syntactically n
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 06:42:08AM -0400, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
>
> This is exim's response to fetchmail. You have exim's syntax checking
> turned on, so it will reject any incoming message which is
> syntactically not a valid email message. This is a good feature if
> your MTA receives m
At 09:59 PM 8/14/2003 -0700, Michael Epting wrote:
I haven't changed any configuration files and I don't see any new
fetchmail bugs, but I'm having big problems the last few days.
Sid, fetchmail, exim3 (I've been meaning to upgrade to exim4, but I'm
not going to do that when my mail is already brok
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 09:59:27PM -0700, Michael Epting wrote:
| I haven't changed any configuration files and I don't see any new
| fetchmail bugs, but I'm having big problems the last few days.
|
| Sid, fetchmail, exim3 (I've been meaning to upgrade to exim4, but I'm
| not going to do that when
17 matches
Mail list logo
