> -----Original Message-----
> From: Louis LeBlanc
> > :0fw
> > * !^Subject:.*SAtalk
> > | spamc -u "$LOGNAME"
> >
> > SCANNED=$?
> >
> > :0 Efw
> > * SCANNED ?? ^^0^^
> > | spamassassin -a
>
> I'm pretty sure that wouldn't work. The E causes the second
> to always be skipped unless the first didn't execute - like
> for mail to the SA list.
I agree. I only mentioned it because Gunther wrote it. I was wondering if
I misunderstood the context.
> > I was wondering why we could not do the following:
> >
> > :0
> > * !^Subject:.*Satalk
> > {
> > :0fw: spamassassin.lock
> > * < 256000
> > | spamc
> >
> > :0 efw: spamassassin.lock
> > * < 256000
> > | spamassassin -a
> > }
> >
> > Shouldn't the e mean execute if the previous recipe's condition(s)
> > matched but there was an error in the action? What do you think?
>
> I think you're right with that one - using the lowercase 'e',
> but I'm not sure how an error is defined there. The
> procmailrc manpage has the following:
>
> e This recipe only executes if the immediately preceding recipe
> failed (i.e., the action line was attempted, but resulted in an
> error).
>
> I'd probably go with the following to start off:
>
> :0
> * !^Subject:.*Satalk
> {
> :0fw: spamassassin.lock
> * < 256000
> | spamc
>
> SCANNED=$?
>
> :0fw: spamassassin.lock
> * ! SCANNED ?? ^^0^^
> * < 256000
> | spamassassin -a
> }
I would think that this would probably be more resiliant in that the test
could be moved if needed and there would not be a location dependency. I
agree I like the method you are suggesting starting with better.
> > By the way, the SA FAQ suggests using a lock. I don't know
> if spamc
> > benefits from the lock but I use it anyway.
> > # The lock file ensures that only 1 spamassassin
> invocation happens
> > # at 1 time, to keep the load down.
> > #
> > :0fw: spamassassin.lock
> > * < 256000
> > | spamassassin
>
> Probably a good idea. Even if this is unnecessary, it will
> probably reduce the load when dozens of messages come in at once.
It was always suggested that when in doubt, lock it.
I have a test server that I can try testing this. I'll let you know my
results. Please let me know your results if you beat me to it!
--Larry
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
