On Tue 09 May, John Beranek wrote:
>
> Additionally, how would I do this for new messages...I'm using a
> procmail filter to process my mail...I guess it's done through procmail
> some how.
Ahem, answered part of my own message...I put in my resource
file, and new messages don't contain the a
I've got an existing archive of a mailing list, and people on the
mailing list have just started mumbling about privacy and spam
protection...so, is it possible to remove everything after the @
in "from" addresses in the existing archive?
Additionally, how would I do this for new messages...
John Beranek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ahem, answered part of my own message...I put in my resource
>file, and new messages don't contain the address.
>
>However, this doesn't work for old messages...
Here's a little script I wrote when I was in the same situation. It's
more aggressive than s
On 5/9/2000 at 9:59 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Beranek) wrote:
> However, this doesn't work for old messages...
Run mhonarc on your old archives with -editidx, and your current
resource file.
-nat
On Tue, 9 May 2000 09:44:40 +0100 (BST)
John Beranek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've got an existing archive of a mailing list, and people on
> the mailing list have just started mumbling about privacy and spam
> protection...so, is it possible to remove everything after the @
> in "from" ad
On Tue, 9 May 2000 07:50:23 -0400 (EDT)
Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John Beranek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's a little script I wrote when I was in the same
> situation. It's more aggressive than spammode, though, because it
> cloaks all addresses in the file.
> #!/usr/loca
On May 1, 2000 at 13:57, Eric Ray wrote:
> Here's the beginning of one of the problematic archives
>
>
... [snip] ...
>
>
>
... [snip] ...
>
>
> As far as I can tell, they're identical in the significant ways. The Sender
> is a .bitnet address in the non-functional ones, but ...
Some foll
