Re: Procmail vs. Mutt variables

2000-06-05 Thread Mikko Hänninen
clemensF <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Mon, 05 Jun 2000: > > Actually, you could embed `mkdir -p ` in any command -- it gets > > expanded but the result is an empty string. However the command does > > run. :-) > > whowherewhat? where are commands like this allowed like this? In things where yo

Re: Procmail vs. Mutt variables

2000-06-05 Thread clemensF
> Mikko Hänninen: > Actually, you could embed `mkdir -p ` in any command -- it gets > expanded but the result is an empty string. However the command does > run. :-) whowherewhat? where are commands like this allowed like this? -- clemens

Re: Procmail vs. Mutt variables

2000-06-05 Thread Mikko Hänninen
David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Mon, 05 Jun 2000: > I'm not sure I understand what you're asking, but I'll take a whack at > it. I didn't understand it either, but your guess does seem to make sense... > You want mutt to have a save-hook that will specify a directory of > mailboxes which

Re: Procmail vs. Mutt variables

2000-06-04 Thread David T-G
Jason -- ...and then [EMAIL PROTECTED] said... % I found this in the procmailex man page: Good enough... % ... % :0: % * meeting % `date +%y-%m`/meeting ... % :0 Wic % * ? test ! -d $MONTHFOLDER % | mkdir $MON

Procmail vs. Mutt variables

2000-06-04 Thread jgh
I found this in the procmailex man page: Store all the messages about meetings in a folder that is in a directory that changes every month. E.g. if it were January 1994, the folder would have the name `94-01/meet­ ing' and the locallockfile would be `94-01/meeting.lock