Re: mailbox list problem
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:38:10AM -0500, Kyle Wheeler wrote: On Sunday, August 9 at 09:14 PM, quoth Robert Holtzman: The problem was that I stupidly modified the list of mail lists to duplicate the list of mailboxes. When I went back and realized what I had done I restored both lists from my backup (let's hear it for backups!)and added the rkhunter and sounder lists. Now I'm getting this error message: Error in /home/holtzm/.muttrc, line 298: +saved-slrn-user: unknown command source: errors in /home/holtzm/.muttrc Press any key to continue... Generally speaking, that means that you have a line that starts with “+saved-slrn-usr”, rather than with a regular command. #mailboxes ! +mutt-dev +mutt-users +open-pgp +wmaker +hurricane +vim +ietf \ 287 # +drums 288 289 290 mailboxes ! +INCOMING +list-Chevelle +list-PLUG-discuss +list-alpine-info \ 291 +list-clamav +list-debian-users +list-exim-users +list-firefox-support \ 292 +list-gnupg-users +list-mondo-devel +list-mutt-users +list-openoffice-discuss \ 293 +list-openoffice-users +list-procmail +list-slrn-user +list-ubuntu-users +spam \ 294 +list-rkhunter +list-sounder +list+saved-alpine +saved-Chevelle +saved-clamav \ 295 +saved-debian-users +saved-firefox-support +saved-gnupg-users +saved-mondo-devel \ 296 +saved-mutt-users +saved-openoffice-users +saved-PLUG +saved-procmail \ 297 +saved-slrn-user +saved-ubuntu-users +saved-messages \ 298 #mailboxes `echo $HOME/Mail/*` Two things: first, I think you have a space at the end of line 295 (after the backslash), which breaks the line wrapping. Second, you told mutt to connect lines 297 and 298 (with the backslash at the end), so mutt identifies the whole line by it’s last line number. That nailed it. I never would have caught it. The line wrapping is weird but you can follow it. When I get into trouble like that, I always first glue the wrapped lines back together. You have no idea how often (or in how many different programs) doing that has revealed to me that I had a simple line-wrapping error, rather than some other problem. That tip is worth a lot of beer if you're ever in the area. (Do you know what the + is there for?) As a matter of fact no. Explain, please. I thought not - lots of folks get tripped up by that. It’s actually a shortcut for a mailbox specification. Both the + symbol and the = symbol can be used when specifying a mailbox name as a shorthand for the value of $folder. Think of it this way (I’m using example names here): the mailboxes command expects FULL PATHS to mailboxes, like this: mailboxes /home/myname/mail/inbox /home/myname/mail/lists But that’s a lot to type, and can make the list of mailboxes hard to read. BUT, you can do this instead: set folder=/home/myname/mail mailboxes +inbox +lists The equals sign is a synonym for the plus sign in this context, and can be used as well, if you prefer it: set folder=/home/myname/mail mailboxes =inbox =lists This can be especially useful when using things like imap, where $folder is something big and ugly like “imaps://user:passw...@imap.server.com/INBOX”. That's the kind of information I have never bee able to get running searches and reading docs. What, specifically, are you trying to do? I mean, you can literally start a www browser in an external program by doing this: !firefox Not sure where in ~/.muttrc to put this. I didn’t say you put that in your muttrc, I said you’d “do” that, by which I mean “this is a key sequence to press while running mutt.” Sorry if I was unclear. By default, the exclamation mark (pressed while mutt is running) tells mutt to get ready to run a shell command. Once you press that, type in “firefox” (or whatever command to launch a web browser), and hit return. That will cause mutt to run that command. But that’s just a way to “launch a web browser”, not a way to send URLs from your email to that browser. Pardon my seeming ingratitude but from your description, it doesn't seem to do any more than if I switched workspaces, opened FF and pasted in the url. Did I miss something? Nope, that’s exactly right. I didn’t quite understand what you were trying to do, so that seemed as good an answer as any other. I was hoping to duplicate slrn's capability of showing a menu with all the urls in the message allowing you to highlight one and hit return. That opens the browser in the ~/.slrnrc file and loads the selected url. I ran across the urlscan package in the repository and installed it. The description indicates that it is at least close to what I want. Haven't had a chance to play with it yet. I noticed that I had inadvertantly replied directly to you a couple of times instead of to the list. My apologies. Many thanks for walking me thru all this. Coming
Re: why is there no auto $ (save changes to mailbox)?
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 09:23:59AM -0400, Marc Vaillant wrote: Hi all, I've been a happy mutt user for over a decade. Of course there are a few minor features here and there that I wish mutt had. The one that's really getting to me lately is that as far as I know, there is no automatic way to execute $. i.e. save changes to mailbox. This is particularly a problem for IMAP because losing your internet connection (e.g. sleeping your laptop) usually means losing mailbox changes. If there is a mechanism for accomplishing this now please let me know. Otherwise, it seems natural for it to be an action during mail check? Shouldn't there be at least an auto save/recover mechanism? Hi, Personally, I'd use screen :) Best regards signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: why is there no auto $ (save changes to mailbox)?
ed schrieb: On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 09:23:59AM -0400, Marc Vaillant wrote: particularly a problem for IMAP because losing your internet connection (e.g. sleeping your laptop) usually means losing mailbox changes. Personally, I'd use screen :) which, however, doesn't solve the problem described... ;-P -- Joost Kremers Life has its moments
Re: why is there no auto $ (save changes to mailbox)?
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 09:10:49AM +, ed wrote: On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 09:23:59AM -0400, Marc Vaillant wrote: Hi all, I've been a happy mutt user for over a decade. Of course there are a few minor features here and there that I wish mutt had. The one that's really getting to me lately is that as far as I know, there is no automatic way to execute $. i.e. save changes to mailbox. This is particularly a problem for IMAP because losing your internet connection (e.g. sleeping your laptop) usually means losing mailbox changes. If there is a mechanism for accomplishing this now please let me know. Otherwise, it seems natural for it to be an action during mail check? Shouldn't there be at least an auto save/recover mechanism? Hi, Personally, I'd use screen :) I do use screen, but it doesn't help for this problem when you are running mutt locally and not on a remote machine via ssh access. Marc
Re: why is there no auto $ (save changes to mailbox)?
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 07:26:57AM +0200, Rejo Zenger wrote: ++ 10/08/09 16:44 +0200 - Michael Tatge: there is no automatic way to execute $. i.e. save changes to mailbox. This is particularly a problem for IMAP because losing your internet connection (e.g. sleeping your laptop) usually means losing mailbox changes. No, there isn't. And that's a good thing (TM). I don't want messages to be auto deleted. No messages will be auto deleted. The only thing that happens is that messages you earlier have marked as to be deleted will be actually deleted. Or better, any changes you have made to the status of the message is comitted. The behaviour wouldn't be any different from exiting a mailbox or pressing $. And, in the spirit of mutt, such a setting would be configurable. One can turn it on or off and set the interval. I can't think of a reason why this would be bad (especialy if it's configurable and the default is off). Thanks Rejo, I'm glad that I'm not the only one that would see this as a valuable feature. For now--per Michael's suggestion, I have covered most of the cases with the following macros: macro index return display-messagesync-mailbox macro compose y send-messagesync-mailbox macro pager q exitsync-mailbox This doesn't cover N - O flag changes but at least I'm not losing reply and read flags. Marc
Re: why is there no auto $ (save changes to mailbox)?
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 07:26:57AM +0200, Rejo Zenger wrote: No messages will be auto deleted. The only thing that happens is that messages you earlier have marked as to be deleted will be actually deleted. Or better, any changes you have made to the status of the message is comitted. The behaviour wouldn't be any different from exiting a mailbox or pressing $. And, in the spirit of mutt, such a setting would be configurable. One can turn it on or off and set the interval. I can't think of a reason why this would be bad (especialy if it's configurable and the default is off). There're some good reasons not to do it and help people by making it harder for them to shoot in their feet. For eexample, you tag tag delete messages and cover messages you didn't want, or have hooks like me that mark duplicates for duplication which would delete valid mail automatically if I weren't paying attention to them immediately. But when I have to care of the manually, I just do the whole syncing business myself. And yes, these messages are auto-deleted when the interval for syncing is up... Rocco
Re: why is there no auto $ (save changes to mailbox)?
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 06:41:51PM +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 07:26:57AM +0200, Rejo Zenger wrote: No messages will be auto deleted. The only thing that happens is that messages you earlier have marked as to be deleted will be actually deleted. Or better, any changes you have made to the status of the message is comitted. The behaviour wouldn't be any different from exiting a mailbox or pressing $. And, in the spirit of mutt, such a setting would be configurable. One can turn it on or off and set the interval. I can't think of a reason why this would be bad (especialy if it's configurable and the default is off). There're some good reasons not to do it and help people by making it harder for them to shoot in their feet. For eexample, you tag tag delete messages and cover messages you didn't want, or have hooks like me that mark duplicates for duplication which would delete valid mail automatically if I weren't paying attention to them immediately. But when I have to care of the manually, I just do the whole syncing business myself. Can't this easily be controlled? set delete=ask-yes. If that's not enough, it suggests that deleting messages should be abstracted from sync-mailbox so that you can sync flags and delete messages independently. Loosing reply flags on e.g. support email--where you often can't remember if you've replied b/c you don't know the person and you're answering the same question over and over--is really a pain. Marc
Malformed From: address in headers
On the python-users mailing lists, there are posts from a user who forges his From: email address to something like: Joe User http://phr...@nospam.invalid The result in mutt with index_format set to: %-30.30n ... is that the following is displayed in the index: python-list-bounces+pgenpaul=gmail@python.org instead of Joe User I edited the mbox and changed the malformed email address in the From: field, to: Joe User phr...@nospam.invalid and on the particular message this fixed the problem. Does anyone know why this is happening, and how I can work around it? Thanks, Gen-Paul.
Re: Malformed From: address in headers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Tuesday, August 11 at 07:41 PM, quoth Patrick Gen Paul: Does anyone know why this is happening, and how I can work around it? I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head: his From: header is invalid. Mutt can see that it's invalid, and so refuses to trust it. As I see it, mutt is behaving defensively. But more specifically, several of those characters are invalid in email addresses, which demonstrates that the header does not contain trustworthy data. Since mutt cannot trust the From header, and thus cannot properly decode that header, it cannot *use* that header. So mutt treats the message almost as if it didn't have that header. For a metaphor: if you were in a restaurant and found something that shouldn't be there (e.g. a screw) in the sauce on the dish you ordered, what would you do? Would you just take the screw out, assume that the sauce is fine, and continue eating? Or would you choose not to eat the sauce? Mutt, like you, chooses not to eat the sauce. Make sense? ~Kyle - -- Reason is itself a matter of faith. It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all. -- G. K. Chesterton -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJKggp7AAoJECuveozR/AWePQgP/2+QbxFJvZwkHgsmOVxFt2Ja NaTvqxK3EmrRmogDQS3wRvSebhzNwBuQEovtTCpytC+xZb/U2i6zzpUkQzgA/cwY DPSOzMA9BML3DhP0bbU7Qe6yImUwKXBvj2gu4sUw1Jdu3GB/CNkNEl15VbSzQxyj JOZQUzUSj23KTa17yBVsXK37JfqvrZOy8yDhOvE5D78oLcHh3HLq53k/nI5/VcBX IPZ8kCyljFgYX8tMSPQfmG5fBdM3ODSVF4ica0GgLhS/g2ZknQGxLR1Z9LUXmi11 Rq/5lF0Fi7U53d9d2vQcGAYgNSYI5JznTBusrds/upEvqHxrnrsaiH+TXm6VXoqN HmRApkJNnPhkM7czf3ScoAylDAiDU6yrl6WvJ6QdOphLRLXsf1yDSl+/69NvWL8n dfGCsny2hNlfYhwPMM2kGA6jcT41eokLPxRR/O+PDJJ12pLt0RcyE5VaSBx4AvTK JGMaFiRahjKK1t6rsPrO8FFKPi8j9QzYwpuZXb22O/coATklmFOQ/rLu+q7VNxkY E5fOBKRQnKDC4W/szYBvGv+TpfhbCldwBwPj4PnC4lqRHT7Zn+5EuMJFTWB8P2ve lw3SulO+RkzJVMOfOkV/hcaAMlB02x5s5Yu2ZH1RtDv9RHB+ircndV4uhf/8aDYA VdUuW7BYR8caxzEl+64W =E0Ri -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Malformed From: address in headers
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Kyle Wheelerkyle-m...@memoryhole.net wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Tuesday, August 11 at 07:41 PM, quoth Patrick Gen Paul: Does anyone know why this is happening, and how I can work around it? I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head: his From: header is invalid. Mutt can see that it's invalid, and so refuses to trust it. As I see it, mutt is behaving defensively. But more specifically, several of those characters are invalid in email addresses, which demonstrates that the header does not contain trustworthy data. Since mutt cannot trust the From header, and thus cannot properly decode that header, it cannot *use* that header. So mutt treats the message almost as if it didn't have that header. For a metaphor: if you were in a restaurant and found something that shouldn't be there (e.g. a screw) in the sauce on the dish you ordered, what would you do? Would you just take the screw out, assume that the sauce is fine, and continue eating? Or would you choose not to eat the sauce? Mutt, like you, chooses not to eat the sauce. Make sense? In a roundabout way, as you probably intended. I'm mostly trying to build some form of argumentation that may convince this annoying poster to mend his ways. Is there a well-respected mail etiquette, or RFC even, that I could refer him to? I have contacted the poster via the list and asked him to contact me off-list to discuss further but he has not responded yet. I'm giving him another 24 hours before I killfile him for good. Thank you for your comments, much appreciated. Gen-Paul
Re: Malformed From: address in headers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Tuesday, August 11 at 09:34 PM, quoth Patrick Gen Paul: Is there a well-respected mail etiquette, or RFC even, that I could refer him to? Ah! Why did you say so? I thought you were trying to decide whether or not mutt was misbehaving (I wonder what Thunderbird does with this fellow's email). You may find RFC 822 useful. The relevant header definition is this one: authentic = From : mailbox ; Single author / ( Sender : mailbox ; Actual submittor From : 1#mailbox) ; Multiple Authors He's using the first option, which means his email address MUST conform to the mailbox description, which is as follows: mailbox = addr-spec ; simple address / phrase route-addr ; name addr-spec He's chosen the latter form. His name eats up the phrase portion, so his email address must conform to a route-addr, defined thusly: route-addr = [route] addr-spec Since he's not including a route, the thing within the wockas () MUST conform to the addr-spec definition, which is: addr-spec = local-part @ domain The objectionable part of his address is the local-part, which is required to be formed like so: local-part = word *(. word) His local-part is composed of two words, separated by a period. The FIRST word, though, is broken. A word is: word = atom / quoted-string The quoted-string definition doesn't apply here (since he isn't using quotes), and an atom is defined as: atom = 1*any CHAR except specials, SPACE and CTLs specials, as you'll note in section 3.3 of RFC 822 are: specials = ( / ) / / / @ ; Must be in quoted- / , / ; / : / \ / ; string, to use / . / [ / ] ; within a word. In other words, he's using a colon in an atom, which is explicitly forbidden by the definition of email. Is that sufficiently explicit for you? :) (And, in case you get into an argument with him, addr-spec has not changed, even with more recent less-standardized RFCs) I'm surprised that his email isn't instantly classified as spam. Usually it's just spammers that violate basic well-recognized rules like that, and it's fairly common to blacklist emails that are fundamentally malformed or disobey basic rules like that---especially in an age when it's equally common to see software come out with updates warning security fix! malformed input caused cancer in users; who would have thought a stray colon would cause that kind of trouble! Oh the humanity, how were we poor developers to know that not everyone was trustworthy?!? (or something similar). I'm giving him another 24 hours before I killfile him for good. Good luck with that. ~Kyle - -- I hope our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us, that the less we use our power the greater it will be. -- Thomas Jefferson -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJKgiUTAAoJECuveozR/AWeASkQAJo5MNo9UNVRzck5w/2sjMg/ ROFd2Y51ycHNilQ6Vzf07dKpg46ZbdP76eClF2uJ2B8rd5tE4Adyf+pFjpzMyYRT if9S1D1JaTzHuIsN09ntCmks+vJHMSMAAZ4x8W5SGJNhJd45mL4Yruhh7ix0mtYc 3B7Ed5NmZJMDoTyC6RNI+tzTE6pOn5OPNfxhn4Cd+qJHTEUii+twj0kuHG2RMLOT ZkTR4AoQ/e6qJYdt/r1xQLxP/XwnaMCvsMAOVE9zCJ+dec1K6n2pF/xUIX1agPIh 8VOZQSBgOFCGUnkaBXSDYrwgbFmGvPJA5vji0ciFCCyL1cxkoBMtivwi7m0ob03m EQ6NFsdjsIdmjvkgLP+iim4l3n7WHWD51YGghkEH0Hs080TUUzmAdzmJNRayptat FzqX/uVc079HOM/4XK0PeTPEX2D1Skl3MULnzpkUW3OyirNIGtvYNRrT6zIBEitD /b8r5oJvnyZasvzX3hIwyRJh9ZBPdTbqlb1WQUGJFaIrvAgro3WFfEm9C/TnUP// //uj3D7TDtWdscfZJcMCRhPkPVKmsC+pQlitDsvkwU1aemYZijfyDccwnJ7I/j0/ CU5euhkQ7Dpb7rHiRB0P43BioaQF0XbfGr0ALtT0NNVdrncsgqY0dpmnrwlCFkTq O0+SBtXLNQ4GhxcejNTP =8hBN -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Malformed From: address in headers
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:12 PM, Kyle Wheelerkyle-m...@memoryhole.net wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Tuesday, August 11 at 09:34 PM, quoth Patrick Gen Paul: Is there a well-respected mail etiquette, or RFC even, that I could refer him to? Ah! Why did you say so? I thought you were trying to decide whether or not mutt was misbehaving (I wonder what Thunderbird does with this fellow's email). Sorry, I should have mentioned that I was convinced from the word go that there's nothing wrong with mutt's behavior, since no other email on this list or any of the thirty I am subscribed to is thus affected. In any case I would never think of filing a bug report for something this frivolous. Was thinking the fellow might start arguing and quite easily may know a bit more about electronic mail than I do. Call it getting ready for the onslaught :-) Funny your mentioning T-Bird, btw, since my correspondent (?) actually appears to use gnus. You may find RFC 822 useful. The relevant header definition is this one: authentic = From : mailbox ; Single author / ( Sender : mailbox ; Actual submittor From : 1#mailbox) ; Multiple Authors He's using the first option, which means his email address MUST conform to the mailbox description, which is as follows: mailbox = addr-spec ; simple address / phrase route-addr ; name addr-spec He's chosen the latter form. His name eats up the phrase portion, so his email address must conform to a route-addr, defined thusly: route-addr = [route] addr-spec Since he's not including a route, the thing within the wockas () MUST conform to the addr-spec definition, which is: wockas..? addr-spec = local-part @ domain The objectionable part of his address is the local-part, which is required to be formed like so: local-part = word *(. word) His local-part is composed of two words, separated by a period. The FIRST word, though, is broken. A word is: word = atom / quoted-string The quoted-string definition doesn't apply here (since he isn't using quotes), and an atom is defined as: atom = 1*any CHAR except specials, SPACE and CTLs specials, as you'll note in section 3.3 of RFC 822 are: specials = ( / ) / / / @ ; Must be in quoted- / , / ; / : / \ / ; string, to use / . / [ / ] ; within a word. In other words, he's using a colon in an atom, which is explicitly forbidden by the definition of email. Is that sufficiently explicit for you? :) :-) (And, in case you get into an argument with him, addr-spec has not changed, even with more recent less-standardized RFCs) .. I'm planning on politely asking him to desist - the simple fact that he starts to argue would be quite sufficient to categorize him as killfile fodder. I'm surprised that his email isn't instantly classified as spam. Usually it's just spammers that violate basic well-recognized rules like that, and it's fairly common to blacklist emails that are fundamentally malformed or disobey basic rules like that---especially in an age when it's equally common to see software come out with updates warning security fix! malformed input caused cancer in users; who would have thought a stray colon would cause that kind of trouble! Oh the humanity, how were we poor developers to know that not everyone was trustworthy?!? (or something similar). That, actually is a much better option than killfiling him locally..!! If he is not amenable, I'll contact the list's whip and ask him to ban the guy until he make amends. With your permission, I will point my report as spam to your exposé I'm giving him another 24 hours before I killfile him for good. Good luck with that. Adding a procmail rule that directs his ensuing contributions to my SPAM folder shouldn't be too hard. Thank you, Gen-Paul.
Re: Malformed From: address in headers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Tuesday, August 11 at 11:47 PM, quoth Patrick Gen Paul: Funny your mentioning T-Bird, btw, since my correspondent (?) actually appears to use gnus. Huh. Since he's not including a route, the thing within the wockas () MUST conform to the addr-spec definition, which is: wockas..? :) A name for greater-than and less-than symbols, collectively. Hmm... I don't know where I got it from (Google has no idea either, though I may be mispelling it). I thought it was a common name (like shebang for #!), but Google makes me doubt myself. With your permission, I will point my report as spam to your exposé Heh, well, I'm not saying he *should* be spam, I'm just surprised he isn't already classified that way. But feel free to point anyone at my email. :) ~Kyle - -- Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper. -- Robert Frost -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJKgkO2AAoJECuveozR/AWeqN4P/2Wno/R5JlDysQRlEvB4CNtk vDxemD04w2NaMpoBIdGRyGPSjDuvFLMv87VofQ31rWVowowdJCMs4ALG1A+r+7Cv 2Vop8WLbkVMvm+kRO50sOoFcovhTKr62awrCL5AjTtq8tuyfdl2kDnL8q7GHJ5AF iA2O/3E+xDxPCSnyDiaSZmmROoh6fP1XkO1u6IhDRTpheLZV9H38kFq0stBfiR4W FE1UeJvmsVdUMWx5jxRdcVCYf4nEEYI5TPLO/9DL9tqqp+2nT69nyjB+jrU2HKkb +X7Ss72Xn9V5dG1ewMo/t6r0F1uk6BPlAPRefX9AzbGKqW6BAqTVDGnk10w0rSVf ZZHLIiHj+U8OZMLfBszYwq/OupfB43aDLa+hZkHHEoSDN9iaGB8rWI0vfv4WRl5w G41QzTVTJmSCQfI7OGKcMJCs2POYdjSmChsuGvdDgIDxii+fVVbObvyLnHAonOul wUCSY0aWxBfAsS6b0eOlcOjxk9TZuGaCMPs4jAM60JL8Yi+4BmoRCd0iYOE7BfkD AMVpnHBTJNVY2MJ25v6o+aoKA/gUZ4yVYlS5+w+FnYhrFNpqWflWDHxmzw0OTW5Q mJ+iRR914gta5x9+/UElbbikIkauYROQVtbKesI4frOhbqHqD8hQz41ePr8+tUPm 7/ZZRtxlB5LCv/3dFpTg =QNlS -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Malformed From: address in headers
On 11Aug2009 19:41, Patrick Gen Paul pgenp...@gmail.com wrote: | On the python-users mailing lists, there are posts from a user who | forges his From: email address to something like: | | Joe User http://phr...@nospam.invalid Ah, so I'm not the only person irritated by this guy. Possibly mutt users are the only ones whose MUAs protect them to the extent of hiding the From: altogether. [...] | I edited the mbox and changed the malformed email address in the From: | field, to: | Joe User phr...@nospam.invalid | and on the particular message this fixed the problem. I'm thinking about getting procmail to rewrite that header as you describe. Maybe (untested): :0whf * ^from:.*http://phr...@nospam.invalid | formail -i 'From: Joe User phr...@nospam.invalid' ahead of the other rules. Cheers, -- Cameron Simpson c...@zip.com.au DoD#743 http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/ Archiving the net is like washing toilet paper! - Leader Kibo
Re: Malformed From: address in headers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Tuesday, August 11 at 11:23 PM, quoth Kyle Wheeler: wockas..? :) A name for greater-than and less-than symbols, collectively. Hmm... I don't know where I got it from (Google has no idea either, though I may be mispelling it). I thought it was a common name (like shebang for #!), but Google makes me doubt myself. I believe it's a PacMan thing. or are both PacMan mouths, and he says wocka all the time, so they're wockas. But don't ask me where or when I first started calling them that; I don't know. ~Kyle - -- Ten percent of people can think, another ten percent of people think that they think, and eighty percent of people would rather die than be made to think. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJKgk4+AAoJECuveozR/AWezc0P/3dw+1LsVPxyUJiPKG+3ItJf Jg6zypWTmG9hjmgiVAcXoMkYqCsvWkdzo4PYXPnLYDSIeByhMXzQXB49o5Qrx9I6 0jBlmnkRoy5gD3cFC5O8k8NZUEsBi5PHNHvI3pRwRQOWszXQKwEEV2Uq9e2oaG/u cp2A+GMPQrBHCyywRsA5GCxcZLGkb2Kvy61nLHWNDcChBOW6pfAV5N1722ykvdTz D9Kj/yXRVmOhMWWjNWjVluaFkYsQFKK7rN+zOGztGRQjzHHk/5yZhirJVZ6ANxAJ Ln7sXj8NNFm3QWHsOXHsItwNh8vIVXJQx9Nu77n0384/O3UMBEUFxUmorcHxhjt2 2X6Mxu4weyTHLgY5qb1jZRxJ1AxZJfmlit4a31dc3jzH+v03yncTOVmgH54kNwx+ BTmBOFTUS2MtSqmapDISHGUAA/DwrdLKt8Jm5E56G2YNpoHLNjkMMO3YlUB7uQgk pCUZpyV4+epPGhReSbhVM5R2T5whaWx8PPGWVsnI/tA7x2qbHEVLDmbLb6esJWSN VCSJLFWC/nTqm9lFErotPyxo6DBTkPVFp6mBOMHRFLCrSTTbp6Tt5RqGsfBVZJzl 1kZwb3UJXvp0JDn4rcq+XkP27oZt5PuNOqL1NbClA9kwQm+yafUuUT6oKAfSj7xG hXGM7inOfZh87QAzbcrw =TlrT -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Malformed From: address in headers
On 12Aug2009 14:56, I wrote:
| I'm thinking about getting procmail to rewrite that header
| as you describe. Maybe (untested):
|
| :0whf
| * ^from:.*http://phr...@nospam.invalid
| | formail -i 'From: Joe User phr...@nospam.invalid'
|
| ahead of the other rules.
I'm now running with this:
:0
* ^from:.*http://phr...@nospam.invalid
{
:0whf
| sed '/^[Ff]rom:/s|http://||'
}
Seems to work. (I know that can be written as a single clause instead of
nested; the above is a syntactic thing for my mail rule processor.)
Cheers,
--
Cameron Simpson c...@zip.com.au DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/
Neomort : Brain-dead human, kept alive for medical purposes.
Medicine Lecturer : Brain-dead human, kept alive for medical purposes.
