On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 22:57 +0000, Arthur Dent wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 11:35:17PM +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> Thanks for this. I appreciate you taking the time to explain this. I respect
> your opinion so I have the locks in place just as you suggest.
>
> Incidentally, with those locks in place (including on the copy section, and
> incorporating the "numerical" filter just as you wrote it, I have now had a
> range of real mail. This includes some regular mail, some "normal" spam and
> some
> "numerical" spam. None of them triggered that lock error.
>
> As well as my test message, I piped an old "real" spam message through and
> they *both* caused the error.
>
> It seems therefore that there is only a problem when Procmail tries to copy a
> message
> that already exists into the backup mbox(?) Could this be?
No. Procmail does by no means check the content. It merely appends.
Also, the contents of your test messages are entirely irrelevant, as
long as procmail happily processes them and the receipt matches.
> It's strange because there
> is no such problem with the "IN-Spam" mbox. There can be as many copies as I
> like in there...
> I have checked and the permissions are identical (and same owner/group too).
> The *only*
> difference is that the backup mbox lives on a different partition (ext3 fs
> mounted with
> fstab). Could that be significant?
Nope. So this locking issue actually happens with any test message?
Still looks like some kind of permission problem the way you call
procmail for testing.
> Anyway, test messages aside, real mail (spam or otherwise) seems to be
> processed without problem, so, once again...
>
> Thanks!
You're welcome.
guenther
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
