And [EMAIL PROTECTED] spoke unto the world. And said: > From: Florent Rougon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Jonas J Linde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> Procmail is a big tool, I need something different: small, reliable, >> >> secure. >> > >> > Big? The gzipped source tar ball is 227kB. If you want something that >> > processes mail in a fully customizable way I'm pretty sure you won't >> find >> > anything much smaller than that. >>
> Great! 227kb of source tar ball... Netfilter's code is, much or less, > the same. I think you consider netfilter a small tool, isn't you? Eh, we're talking about combining this with gnupg which is 3.5MB in source tar ball; so yes, I'd consider procmail a reasonably small tool considering that full customization was one of the requirements. >> Well, the procmail source code is written in a very... bizarre style. >> In my book, it doesn't qualify as reliable. > I agree. Yeah, the code isn't all that beautiful but at least the author is using the same style consistently. I've seen worse; a lot worse... >> And please, don't think you can start flaming right away because you >> have been using procmail for the past ten years or so and never had the >> slightest impression of it losing a mail. That is not the point. The >> point is that its source code is very unpleasant to me, so *I* wouldn't >> rely on it for anything serious. That has nothing to do with your >> experience of its use. > I agree again. Flaming? You asked a question, I gave a suggestion and there was a disagreement about the size of the tools. Where is the flaming in that? Or did you just agree to the latter part of that paragraph? In that case I agree too. > Moreover I think fetchmail/procmail solution doesn't fit my needs. Stop. But of course. I'm not arguing that you should use these tools against your judgement. I would be interested in hearing if you find any better solution though. As was properly guessed I have been using the fetch- / procmail combination for ten years or so; apparently without loosing mail; the tricky part is to avoid mail loops. ;) > If someone has another idea...great. Not me, sorry. > Otherwise...thanks. You're welcome. :) -- Jonas J Linde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.init.se/~jonas/ +46-707-492496 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ GE/IT$ d-() s++: a C++(++++)$ UBVL++(++++)$ P++ L+++$ E++ W++(-) N+ o-- K+ !w(+) O M@ V PS+ PE++(-) Y+ PGP+>++ t 5 X R-@ tv- b+>++ DI D++ G++(-) e+++ h--(----) r++ y++++ UF+
