Sahil Tandon wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009, KLaM Postmaster wrote:
>
>
>>> Ok, I'm intrigued... if it is this simple, maybe I'll go ahead and do
>>> it, but...
>>>
>>> As I said in an earlier mail, I do NOT want the folder auto-created - if
>>> it doesn't exist, I want the message deliver to fall
On Sun, 08 Mar 2009, KLaM Postmaster wrote:
> > Ok, I'm intrigued... if it is this simple, maybe I'll go ahead and do
> > it, but...
> >
> > As I said in an earlier mail, I do NOT want the folder auto-created - if
> > it doesn't exist, I want the message deliver to fall back to the Inbox...
> >
>
Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 3/7/2009 1:45 PM, LuKreme wrote:
>
>>> Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on
>>> the fly... thje purpose for using the extension will be for signing
>>> up for different sites/lists/things, so I can use the same address,
>>> but be able to
Charles Marcus a écrit :
> On 3/7/2009 1:45 PM, LuKreme wrote:
>>> Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on
>>> the fly... thje purpose for using the extension will be for signing
>>> up for different sites/lists/things, so I can use the same address,
>>> but be able to d
On 7-Mar-2009, at 12:13, Charles Marcus wrote:
As I said in an earlier mail, I do NOT want the folder auto-created
- if
it doesn't exist, I want the message deliver to fall back to the
Inbox...
Is there a way to tweak the above to accomplish this?
Sure, you can do most anything in procmai
On 3/7/2009 1:45 PM, LuKreme wrote:
>> Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on
>> the fly... thje purpose for using the extension will be for signing
>> up for different sites/lists/things, so I can use the same address,
>> but be able to distinguish mail that comes to m
Noel Jones a écrit :
> Charles Marcus wrote:
>> On 3/7/2009, mouss (mo...@ml.netoyen.net) wrote:
>>> if all extensions are acceptable (not very recommended),
>>
>> Ok, this caught my attention...
>>
>> Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on the
>> fly... thje purpose fo
On 7-Mar-2009, at 08:39, Noel Jones wrote:
Postfix does not allow $1 etc. substitution in virtual_mailbox_maps.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#virtual_mailbox_maps
It is pretty easy to set up a procmail transport to be used by postfix:
procmail unix - n n - -
On 7-Mar-2009, at 08:11, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 3/7/2009, mouss (mo...@ml.netoyen.net) wrote:
if all extensions are acceptable (not very recommended),
Ok, this caught my attention...
Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on
the
fly... thje purpose for using the
On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 10:44:54AM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 3/7/2009, Noel Jones (njo...@megan.vbhcs.org) wrote:
> > Some third-party IMAP servers may support "deliver to any extension
> > subfolder", I haven't looked.
>
> They do... both cyrus and dovecot, and I think courier maildrop d
On 3/7/2009, Noel Jones (njo...@megan.vbhcs.org) wrote:
> Some third-party IMAP servers may support "deliver to any extension
> subfolder", I haven't looked.
They do... both cyrus and dovecot, and I think courier maildrop does as
well...
Since I'm going to be converting to dovecot soon, I'll be u
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 3/7/2009, mouss (mo...@ml.netoyen.net) wrote:
if all extensions are acceptable (not very recommended),
Ok, this caught my attention...
Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on the
fly... thje purpose for using the extension will be for signi
On 3/7/2009, mouss (mo...@ml.netoyen.net) wrote:
> if all extensions are acceptable (not very recommended),
Ok, this caught my attention...
Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on the
fly... thje purpose for using the extension will be for signing up for
different site
Charles Marcus a écrit :
> On 3/6/2009 3:43 PM, LuKreme wrote:
>> On 6-Mar-2009, at 12:27, Charles Marcus wrote:
>>> Hmmm... I'm now wondering if ${extension} can somehow be used with the
>>> virtual_mailbox_maps query to accomplish what I want?
>
>> Yes, but you need procmail (or, I assume, Maild
Charles Marcus wrote, at 03/06/2009 02:27 PM:
> I want to be able to use plussed addresses in such a way that if such a
> message comes in and a subfolder matches the extension, the message will
> be delivered to that subfolder, and if there is no matching subfolder,
> it is just delivered to the
On 3/6/2009 3:43 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> On 6-Mar-2009, at 12:27, Charles Marcus wrote:
>> Hmmm... I'm now wondering if ${extension} can somehow be used with the
>> virtual_mailbox_maps query to accomplish what I want?
> Yes, but you need procmail (or, I assume, Maildrop)
Many thanks for the detail.
On 6-Mar-2009, at 12:27, Charles Marcus wrote:
Hmmm... I'm now wondering if ${extension} can somehow be used with the
virtual_mailbox_maps query to accomplish what I want?
Yes, but you need procmail (or, I assume, Maildrop)
in a procmail file you would have:
# based on the procmail pipe in m
Charles Marcus:
> Obviously (also judging from the replies so far), the postfix DA's don't
> support adding flags to accomplish this, like you can with the dovecot
> LDA master.cf entry. So, an obvious follow-up would be, is there a
> reason postfix's DAs don't support this? I'm not complaining, ju
On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 02:27:56PM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
> It would be nice if the postfix local and/or virtual DA master.cf
> entries allowed the addition of these flags to be able to do this...
>
> I guess in this situation I'll have to wait until I have converted to
> dovecot so I can u
>> I'm sure this is something I'm totally missing but I have a system I'm
>> trying to get plus addressing working, and not having any luck. The
>> email is delivered, but just to the Inbox, not to the folder...
>>
>> I've got the recipient delimiter enabled in main.cf (output of postconf
>> -n sho
On 27-Feb-2009, at 15:48, Charles Marcus wrote:
I'm sure this is something I'm totally missing but I have a system I'm
trying to get plus addressing working, and not having any luck. The
email is delivered, but just to the Inbox, not to the folder...
It is not postfix's job to deliver to the fo
Charles Marcus a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> I'm sure this is something I'm totally missing but I have a system I'm
> trying to get plus addressing working, and not having any luck. The
> email is delivered, but just to the Inbox, not to the folder...
>
> I've got the recipient delimiter enabled in main
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 05:48:35PM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
> I'm sure this is something I'm totally missing but I have a system I'm
> trying to get plus addressing working, and not having any luck. The
> email is delivered, but just to the Inbox, not to the folder...
Plus addressing is worki
Charles Marcus wrote:
Hello,
I'm sure this is something I'm totally missing but I have a system I'm
trying to get plus addressing working, and not having any luck. The
email is delivered, but just to the Inbox, not to the folder...
I've got the recipient delimiter enabled in main.cf (output of
Hello,
I'm sure this is something I'm totally missing but I have a system I'm
trying to get plus addressing working, and not having any luck. The
email is delivered, but just to the Inbox, not to the folder...
I've got the recipient delimiter enabled in main.cf (output of postconf
-n shows it ena
25 matches
Mail list logo
