On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Xu Wang [05-20-16 16:14]:
>> procmail seems so useful and I do not know of a good replacement for
>> some of its resources. I use the formail tool quite often.
>>
>> I find it strange that such a useful too
* Xu Wang [05-20-16 16:14]:
> procmail seems so useful and I do not know of a good replacement for
> some of its resources. I use the formail tool quite often.
>
> I find it strange that such a useful tool never gained a maintainer.
> Here is a useful message:
> http://marc.inf
procmail seems so useful and I do not know of a good replacement for
some of its resources. I use the formail tool quite often.
I find it strange that such a useful tool never gained a maintainer.
Here is a useful message:
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=141634350915839&w=2
but
ived emails from pop server to
> > > procmail instead of putting those to the spoolfile?
> >
> > Not directly using mutt, but a simple matter using fetchmail or another
> > mail retrieval agent. I use fetchmail.
>
> Yeah, I shifted to that mode last night.
>
* Srikrishan Malik [06-24-14 23:30]:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 04:47:45PM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> > * Srikrishan Malik [06-24-14 02:02]:
> > > I am using the inbuilt pop and smtp for gmail.
> > > Is there a way to forward all received emails from pop serve
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 04:47:45PM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Srikrishan Malik [06-24-14 02:02]:
> > I am using the inbuilt pop and smtp for gmail.
> > Is there a way to forward all received emails from pop server to
> > procmail instead of putting those to th
* Srikrishan Malik [06-24-14 02:02]:
> I am using the inbuilt pop and smtp for gmail.
> Is there a way to forward all received emails from pop server to
> procmail instead of putting those to the spoolfile?
Not directly using mutt, but a simple matter using fetchmail or another
mail
Hello,
I am using the inbuilt pop and smtp for gmail.
Is there a way to forward all received emails from pop server to
procmail instead of putting those to the spoolfile?
Thanks
Sri
Most importantly, there is a nice procmail recipe in that procmailrc that
creates list inboxes automatically
as soon as you sign up for a mailing list, procmail will create it as a new
inbox for you automatically... pretty cool
:0:
* ^((List-Id|X-(Mailing-)?List):(.*[<]\/[^>]*))
{
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:37:04PM +, Tony's unattended mail wrote:
> > However, I find dovecot deliver (which uses the sieve language
> > for filtering) to be much more readable/writable than procmail.
>
> Sieve does not include regular expressions -- I shit you n
/ Tony's unattended mail wrote on Sat 10.Nov'12 at 22:37:04 + /
> > However, I find dovecot deliver (which uses the sieve language
> > for filtering) to be much more readable/writable than procmail.
>
> Sieve does not include regular expressions -- I shit
> However, I find dovecot deliver (which uses the sieve language
> for filtering) to be much more readable/writable than procmail.
Sieve does not include regular expressions -- I shit you not.
Dovecote needs regular expression capability to be shoe-horned in by
some hokey plugin. R
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 02:49:48PM +0200, Nikola Petrov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 11:17:06PM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:17:35AM +0200, Nikola Petrov wrote:
> > > No it doesn't deliver them to you. It sort of filters them online on the
> > > server. You can t
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:17:35AM +0200, Nikola Petrov wrote:
> No it doesn't deliver them to you. It sort of filters them online on the
> server. You can then use something like offlineimap to deliver them
> locally to you. I use imapfilter + offlineimap + notmuch + mutt and I am
> far from happy
/ Chris Green wrote on Thu 8.Nov'12 at 18:13:10 + /
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:06:35AM -0600, Derek Martin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 01:03:07PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> > > Hi Chris, personally, i'd stick with what your current set-up.
> >
> > Ditto. I don't currently
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:06:35AM -0600, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 01:03:07PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> > Hi Chris, personally, i'd stick with what your current set-up.
>
> Ditto. I don't currently do this but that's only because port 25 is
> blocked by my ISP. I'v
* Derek Martin [11-08-12 12:06]:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 01:03:07PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> > Hi Chris, personally, i'd stick with what your current set-up.
>
> Ditto. I don't currently do this but that's only because port 25 is
> blocked by my ISP. I've run my mail this way befor
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 01:03:07PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> Hi Chris, personally, i'd stick with what your current set-up.
Ditto. I don't currently do this but that's only because port 25 is
blocked by my ISP. I've run my mail this way before and would do it
again if it were a practic
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 10:48:45AM -0600, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15:41PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > What does everyone else here do for collecting mail and filtering mail
> > with mutt?
>
> Fetchmail and procmail. Ugly, but ubiquitous an
fetchmail + maildrop works for me.
--
Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer mw...@iupui.edu
Asking whether markets are efficient is like asking whether people are smart.
pgpGksnsN8kgQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
/ Chris Green wrote on Thu 8.Nov'12 at 10:51:59 + /
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 04:33:58PM -0600, David Champion wrote:
> > * On 07 Nov 2012, Derek Martin wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:48:08PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > > > server retrying if my SMTP server isn't running (or conne
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 04:33:58PM -0600, David Champion wrote:
> * On 07 Nov 2012, Derek Martin wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:48:08PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > > server retrying if my SMTP server isn't running (or connected). That's
> > > one of the reasons I'd quite like to move awa
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:17:35AM +0200, Nikola Petrov wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 05:35:45PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > > I am using imapfilter with lua configuration file for my imap account.
> > > That does the job for me and I like the fact that I declare my filters
> > > with actual c
* On 07 Nov 2012, Jeremy Kitchen wrote:
>
> I haven't had it break crypto, but I'm one of 2 people at the company
> doing pgp signatures and both of us send *only* text/plain.
My memory is fuzzy but I think it was more complex multipart signed
messages that it broke.
> I have had it give me te
e else here do for collecting mail and filtering mail
> > > with mutt?
> >
> > Fetchmail and procmail. Ugly, but ubiquitous and reliable.
>
> Same here. I keep meaning to hook in an adaptive spam filter, but I
> haven't bothered so far. Maybe mutt just makes it so e
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 01:06:54AM +0100, Andre Klärner wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 11:21:59PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> > Yes i think the benefits of using your own smtp delivery are worth it.
>
> I can only agree. And to avoid issues when my landline is down I have a VM
> on a big
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 04:33:58PM -0600, David Champion wrote:
> I've used IMAP pickup in the past and it's OK for some IMAP servers. A
> year or two ago my employer moved my mailbox to MS Exchange. Exchange
> doesn't (necessarily?) hand you the exact e-mail it received. It
> parses incoming ma
this all in one program
| than so much the better but I'm happy with two programs if that would
| work better. I can stay with my existing filter system but, again, if I
| can consolidate things into one, easier to maintain, chunk then I'd be
| happy.
|
| I *don't* like procmail co
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 11:21:59PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> Yes i think the benefits of using your own smtp delivery are worth it.
I can only agree. And to avoid issues when my landline is down I have a VM
on a big hoster that on one side delivers all my locally generated mails to
avoid
/ David Champion wrote on Wed 7.Nov'12 at 16:33:58 -0600 /
> * On 07 Nov 2012, Derek Martin wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:48:08PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > > server retrying if my SMTP server isn't running (or connected). That's
> > > one of the reasons I'd quite like to move away f
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 04:33:58PM -0600, David Champion wrote:
> * On 07 Nov 2012, Derek Martin wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:48:08PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > > server retrying if my SMTP server isn't running (or connected). That's
> > > one of the reasons I'd quite like to move awa
* On 07 Nov 2012, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:48:08PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > server retrying if my SMTP server isn't running (or connected). That's
> > one of the reasons I'd quite like to move away from SMTP. It *should*
> > be OK but I'm relying on the other end to
em to mutt? If I can do this all in one program
> > > than so much the better but I'm happy with two programs if that would
> > > work better. I can stay with my existing filter system but, again, if I
> > > can consolidate things into one, easier to maintain, chunk
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:48:08PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> No specific "protective measures" at all, it just relies on the sending
> server retrying if my SMTP server isn't running (or connected). That's
> one of the reasons I'd quite like to move away from SMTP. It *should*
> be OK but I'm r
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 10:48:45AM -0600, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15:41PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > What does everyone else here do for collecting mail and filtering mail
> > with mutt?
>
> Fetchmail and procmail. Ugly, but ubiquitous and reli
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:16:42PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> / Nikola Petrov wrote on Wed 7.Nov'12 at 19:17:46 +0200 /
>
> > On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15:41PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > > I currently have my mail delivered to my desktop system using SMTP as
> > > the system is on all
/ Nikola Petrov wrote on Wed 7.Nov'12 at 19:17:46 +0200 /
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15:41PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> > I currently have my mail delivered to my desktop system using SMTP as
> > the system is on all the time and has a static IP.
> >
> > However I always get paranoid when I r
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 01:04:17PM -0500, Tim Gray wrote:
> On Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15 PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> >I *don't* like procmail configuration files, they're one of the reasons
> >I wrote my own.
> >
> >What does everyone else here do for collecting
On Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15 PM +, Chris Green wrote:
I *don't* like procmail configuration files, they're one of the reasons
I wrote my own.
What does everyone else here do for collecting mail and filtering mail
with mutt?
I use getmail and dovecot deliver. Getmail is great,
> > work better. I can stay with my existing filter system but, again, if I
> > can consolidate things into one, easier to maintain, chunk then I'd be
> > happy.
> >
> >
> > I *don't* like procmail configuration files, they're one of the
> through a filtering system to mutt? If I can do this all in one program
> than so much the better but I'm happy with two programs if that would
> work better. I can stay with my existing filter system but, again, if I
> can consolidate things into one, easier to maintain, chunk
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15:41PM +, Chris Green wrote:
> What does everyone else here do for collecting mail and filtering mail
> with mutt?
Fetchmail and procmail. Ugly, but ubiquitous and reliable. A friend
pointed me at something "better" for mail filtering, but I can&
with two programs if that would
work better. I can stay with my existing filter system but, again, if I
can consolidate things into one, easier to maintain, chunk then I'd be
happy.
I *don't* like procmail configuration files, they're one of the reasons
I wrote my own.
What does e
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 14:39:28 PM -0700, J Wermont wrote:
> M. Fioretti wrote:
>
> > You're welcome! Glad the stuff was useful. For the record, the
> > procmail recipe in my blog post is NOT mine (as duly noted in the post
> > itself and/or in the code). Basically
M. Fioretti wrote:
> You're welcome! Glad the stuff was useful. For the record, the
> procmail recipe in my blog post is NOT mine (as duly noted in the post
> itself and/or in the code). Basically, I had the idea, then whined on
> the procmail list about it until Sean Str
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 22:43:39 PM +0200, Alexis Letessier wrote:
> You're right Will,
>
> I have used tr and sed expressions from Marco and only a part of
> your procmail recipe (* ? script).
>
> Thanks to you two then ;)
You're welcome! Glad the stuff was useful.
You're right Will,
I have used tr and sed expressions from Marco and only a part of your procmail
recipe (* ? script).
Thanks to you two then ;)
On 11/10/12 15:30, Will Fiveash wrote:
> I don't see my script stuff in there so I'm thinking you probably need
> to redirect
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:12:16PM +0200, Alexis Letessier wrote:
> Hi Will,
>
> Thanks again for your ideas.
>
> On 04/10/12 16:04, Will Fiveash wrote:
> > I use procmail and some shell scripts to basically do the same. Here is
> > my .procmail rule:
> >
&
Hi Will,
Thanks again for your ideas.
On 04/10/12 16:04, Will Fiveash wrote:
> I use procmail and some shell scripts to basically do the same. Here is
> my .procmail rule:
>
> # Process killed threads, save killed threads in killedthreads mbox
> :0:
> * ? $HOME/
d of database or
> > > something to redirect threads that i already filtered out.
> > > Is this a strange idea or should i change my workflow? Any ideas on how
> > > this could be implemented?
> >
> > I do the same thing with a custom procmail recipe exp
; Is this a strange idea or should i change my workflow? Any ideas on how
> > this could be implemented?
>
> I do the same thing with a custom procmail recipe explained here on my blog:
>
> http://freesoftware.zona-m.net/how-ignore-uninteresting-threads-in-mailing-lists/
I use pr
Hi Marco,
Your two blog articles on the subject are really helpful.
I will try to adapt the procmail recipe to match message-id based on
notmuch search results in order to filter out unwanted threads:
~ % notmuch search --output=files 'id:14d85b32...@dem006.intra.tt' or
'id:AD
implemented?
I do the same thing with a custom procmail recipe explained here on my blog:
http://freesoftware.zona-m.net/how-ignore-uninteresting-threads-in-mailing-lists/
Marco
http://mfioretti.com
Hello,
I receive all my emails in one box and filter out non interesting mails
in an Archive with mutt. I have some rules to dispatch mailing lists
directly in some mailboxes with procmail but my rules are quite simple.
I would like threads that i previously dispatched in my archive
mailbox to
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 11:38:37AM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Gérard Robin [09-10-11 09:54]:
> >
> > Effectively I had in my ".procmailrc" : DEFAULT=/var/spool/mail/user1
> > but perhaps user1 can't write in /var/spool/mail.
>
> do: ls -d /var/spool/mail
>
> /var/spool/mail should have
Hello Gérard Robin,
Am 2011-09-09 13:11:52, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> Hello,
> I have put a path like this in procmailrc:
>
> :0
> * ^tomutt-us...@mutt.org
This is wrong. If you mean the Macro, it must be
* ^to_mutt-us...@mutt.org
but is you mean the To: header then it has to be
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 11:02:32AM +0100, Athanasius wrote:
..snip..
>
> I'd not come across this before, so checked... and in my setup the
> output for 'default INBOX' is incorrect. It states:
>
> Default rcfile: $HOME/.procmailrc
> It may be writabl
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 11:38:37AM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 11:38:37 -0400
From: Patrick Shanahan
To: mutt-users@mutt.org
Subject: Re: bad path given to procmail
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
* Gérard Robin [09-10-11 09:54]:
Effectively I had in my
* Gérard Robin [09-10-11 09:54]:
>
> Effectively I had in my ".procmailrc" : DEFAULT=/var/spool/mail/user1
> but perhaps user1 can't write in /var/spool/mail.
do: ls -d /var/spool/mail
/var/spool/mail should have rwx for everyone.
--
(paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 11:02:32AM +0100, Athanasius wrote:
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 11:02:32 +0100
From: Athanasius
To: mutt-users@mutt.org
Subject: Re: bad path given to procmail
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 01:24:15PM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
On Fri, Sep
d your .procmailrc file. You will se this:
>
> # Messages that fall through all your procmail recipes are delivered
> # to your default INBOX. To find out yours, run 'procmail -v'
I'd not come across this before, so checked... and in my setup the
output for 'default I
the messages from the list mutt-users were lost.
> Is it possible to avoid losing the messages in this case ? i.e. when the
> path doesn't exist.
Read your .procmailrc file. You will se this:
# Messages that fall through all your procmail recipes are delivered
# to your default INBO
mutt-users were lost.
> Is it possible to avoid losing the messages in this case ? i.e. when the
> path doesn't exist.
The *only* way I know of to "loose" mail via procmail is to direct to
/dev/null. You have the mail somewhere.
Your recipe is faulty and probably did not hand
Hello,
I have put a path like this in procmailrc:
:0
* ^tomutt-us...@mutt.org
MUTT/U11/mutt-`date +%m-%y`
but I had not yet created the directory MUTT/U11 and when I downloaded
my messages the messages from the list mutt-users were lost.
Is it possible to avoid losing the messages in this case ?
Hello Harry Strongburg,
Am 2010-08-16 05:13:28, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> This is wonderful, it works exactly how I want! I had to edit the config
> a bit to get it to work (maybe you did this intentionally to get me to
> learn a bit? :)). Here is the edited working config
ve ever seen!
>
> However you can fetch the messages by using
>
> [ '~/.fetchmailrc' ]
> poll pop.gmail.com proto IMAPS
> usermygmailusername
> passmypasswordhere
> is localusr
> folder INB
es by using
[ '~/.fetchmailrc' ]
poll pop.gmail.com proto IMAPS
usermygmailusername
passmypasswordhere
is localusr
folder INBOX
options mda "/usr/bin/procmail -a INBOX -d %T"
poll pop.gmail.com proto IMAPS
Does anyone know here if there's a way to have Gmail add a header onto email
marked as Spam?
Right now I am using procmail with fetchmail and mutt, and I want procmail to
send all stuff marked as spam into a spam-mailbox on mutt (easy to do, I know
how to do this if there's a header)
On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 10:54:16PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Hello Christian Ebert,
>
> Am 2010-08-05 15:45:48, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> > As Erik is using Maildir even that wouldn't help much as the
> > messages would be delivered to /new/ .
>
> And if he had looked into the arch
Hello Yue Wu,
Am 2010-08-05 21:18:45, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> for j in $(find $2 -type d | grep cur) ; do (
> cd $j ;
> for i in * ;
> do cat $i | formail -ds procmail ;
> done) ;
> done
>
> B
Hello Christian Ebert,
Am 2010-08-05 15:45:48, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> As Erik is using Maildir even that wouldn't help much as the
> messages would be delivered to /new/ .
And if he had looked into the archive of the list, he would
know how to make files read. Including modifying the
On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 10:48:05AM +0800, Yue Wu wrote:
In my case, after re-procmail, every email will be unread, I can't recorgnize
which are those I've read, I have to look those emails one by one and recall
if it's really read or unread by me.
In the script or procmail reci
do (
>> >>cd $j ;
>> >>for i in * ;
>> >>do cat $i | formail -ds procmail ;
>> >>done) ;
>> >>done
>> >>
>> >> But after redeliverd, all emails are new, i.e. unrea
N ;N ?
>
> Or in long form:
>
> pattern = new messages = ~N
>
>
> Optionally use ~O for old messages.
In my case, after re-procmail, every email will be unread, I can't recorgnize
which are those I've read, I have to look those emails one by one and recall
if it's re
On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 08:34:01AM +0800, Yue Wu wrote:
> Orgnizing all mails to be unread then mark the old ones to be read is
> very tedious if mails is many.
Really?
How about T ~N ;N ?
Or in long form:
pattern = new messages = ~N
Optionally use ~O for old messages.
--
Monte
; >> mails become into the unread status. I'm using maildir format, and tried
> >> with
> >> the following script:
> >>
> >>for j in $(find $2 -type d | grep cur) ; do (
> >> cd $j ;
> >>for i in * ;
ied with
>> the following script:
>>
>>for j in $(find $2 -type d | grep cur) ; do (
>>cd $j ;
>>for i in * ;
>>do cat $i | formail -ds procmail ;
>>done) ;
>>done
>>
>> Bu
-type d | grep cur) ; do (
> cd $j ;
> for i in * ;
> do cat $i | formail -ds procmail ;
> done) ;
> done
>
> But after redeliverd, all emails are new, i.e. unread in mutt, that's not what
> I want.
Since they have be
On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 08:50:22AM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Yue Wu [08-05-10 08:39]:
> > Sometimes I want to filter my emails with new rule of procmail, archived
> > list has the way to re-procmail, but all re-procmailed mails will be at
> > the new unread status. M
* Yue Wu [08-05-10 08:39]:
> Sometimes I want to filter my emails with new rule of procmail, archived
> list has the way to re-procmail, but all re-procmailed mails will be at
> the new unread status. My question is, how to re-procmail without
> changing the read/unread status of e
Hi list,
Sometimes I want to filter my emails with new rule of procmail, archived list
has the way to re-procmail, but all re-procmailed mails will be at the new
unread status. My question is, how to re-procmail without changing the
read/unread status of emails?
--
Regards,
Yue Wu
Key
not familiar with notify-send, but I imagine that it's an X
>application and needs to know the identity of the display on which
>to display itself. The process that runs procmail is not associated
>with any display, so notify-send doesn't know what display to use.
>
>You might t
On 2010-07-23, He Wen wrote:
> Hi, Every one!
>
> I try to use notify-send to send a message to my desktop when a new mail
> arrives, but i find notify-send dosen't work with procmail:
>
> In my procmailrc, I have:
>
> # notification
> :0 ic:
> | play /us
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 12:03:26PM +0800, He Wen wrote:
>Hi, Every one!
>
>I try to use notify-send to send a message to my desktop when a new mail
>arrives, but i find notify-send dosen't work with procmail:
>
>In my procmailrc, I have:
>
># notification
>:0 ic:
Hi, Every one!
I try to use notify-send to send a message to my desktop when a new mail
arrives, but i find notify-send dosen't work with procmail:
In my procmailrc, I have:
# notification
:0 ic:
| play /usr/share/sounds/gnome/default/alerts/drip.ogg; notify-send -i
'evolution&
On Sun, Apr 04, 2010 at 07:08:18AM +0800, Yue Wu wrote:
> Hi, list,
>
> Is there one modernized procmail? The biggest complain on procmail is that it
> doesn't support multibyte charactors at all(w/o dirty trick). Or maybe there
> is one better replacement for filtering the ma
On Sun, Apr 04, 2010 at 07:08:18AM +0800, Yue Wu wrote:
> Hi, list,
>
> Is there one modernized procmail? The biggest complain on procmail is that it
> doesn't support multibyte charactors at all(w/o dirty trick). Or maybe there
> is one better replacement for filtering the ma
Hi, list,
Is there one modernized procmail? The biggest complain on procmail is that it
doesn't support multibyte charactors at all(w/o dirty trick). Or maybe there
is one better replacement for filtering the mails? I'm seaking the infos to
make my mutt work with imap(offlineimap?).
-
* Christian Ebert [090607 17:11]:
>
> :0
>
> with Maildir you don't need locking, but
>
> > * ^(From|Cc|To):.*gnome
> > /home/tim/Mail/Gnome
>
> /home/tim/Mail/Gnome/
> ^
> the terminating directory slash.
>
> You might want to poke around a bit in man 5 procmailrc for
> t
* Tim Johnson on Sunday, June 07, 2009 at 16:50:38 -0800
> In the past, when I used mutt, I was using mbox type mailboxes.
> Never had any problems with recipes like this:
> ## begin example
> :0:
:0
with Maildir you don't need locking, but
> * ^(From|Cc|To):.*gnome
> /home/tim/Mail/Gnome
/home
nt to /home/tim/Mail/new - as an example?
Should anyone feel that this should be better posted to a procmail
support, please point me to the correct place for signup.
thanks
--
Tim
t...@johnsons-web.com
http://www.akwebsoft.com
On 2009-01-01, rj wrote:
> When I edit a message, the edited version of it appears as a separate, new
> message in mutt's index, but without a "Lines:" header.
>
> So I pipe it through procmail where I
On 1 Jan 2009 23:29 -0500, by r...@panix.com (rj):
> #
> # Generate a "Lines:" header (needed for maildir mailbox
> # format) using procmail's scoring mechanism. Only
> # message-body lines are counted (not the headers):
It doesn't answer y
When I edit a message, the edited version of it appears as a separate, new
message in mutt's index, but without a "Lines:" header.
So I pipe it through procmail where I have this in my procmailrc:
#
# Generate a "Lines:
roblem so I can
> automate mutt or procmail to display/extract the message and
> possibly inform the sender of their misconfigured email system.
I don't get them often enough to bother pestering people to
reconfigure their email programs (but the webpage you're looking for
is htt
Hello All,
From time to time I receive emails with winmail.dat as an attachment.
A while ago I found a procmail recipe that sent the sender a message
saying that they need to reconfigure Outlook to stop sending it and it
also extracted the files from winmail.dat and put them in the message
lt;- Each process uses a temporary log.
> FINAL_LOG=$MAILDIR/log# <- Append here, via TRAP, at process exit:
> TRAP='procmail -p DEFAULT=$FINAL_LOG /dev/null < $LOGFILE && rm -f $LOGFILE'
>
Off-topic, but an easier way to log everything to one file whic
On Sat, 13 Sep 2008, Aleksandar D. Balalovski wrote:
> hello, I've been using Mutt for half a year now, everything was fine.
> Yesterday I changed some of the recipes in procmailrc and since than
> fetchmail/procmail won't put the mail in the preferred mailbox. It
> puts
* Rejo Zenger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [09-13-08 15:15]:
> ++ 13/09/08 09:20 -0400 - Patrick Shanahan:
> >Well, your procmail recipe will not work as the matches begin at the
> >start of the recipe, ie: ^TO
> >and your recipe will not match a normal "To:" Header
++ 13/09/08 09:20 -0400 - Patrick Shanahan:
>Well, your procmail recipe will not work as the matches begin at the
>start of the recipe, ie: ^TO
>and your recipe will not match a normal "To:" Header.
>and will not deliver to "Maildir" type mailboxes, needs trailin
1 - 100 of 645 matches
Mail list logo
