Hi,
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 05:08:22PM -0600, David Champion wrote:
* On 09 Dec 2014, John Long wrote:
The messages seem to all have message-ids in the form
bunchofch...@m.something.com
You'll need to be much more specific if you want help writing a matching
regex. Is something a
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 04:17:00PM -0500, Nathan Stratton Treadway wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 20:39:16 +, John Long wrote:
score '~i @m\..*\.com' -
matches on
Message-ID: 5486ad9f.8186460a.0aee.1...@mx.google.com
You want the actual regex to contain
* On 10 Dec 2014, John Long wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 05:08:22PM -0600, David Champion wrote:
* On 09 Dec 2014, John Long wrote:
The messages seem to all have message-ids in the form
bunchofch...@m.something.com
You'll need to be much more specific if you want help
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 06:50:30AM -0600, David Champion wrote:
OK, I see what I'm missing now: it's the m vs mx. You're right,
getting the regex right for this one will be enough -- for now. But
it turns out that more than one site uses m.*.com hostnames, so
you'll be back in this position
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 04:28:53PM -0500, Nathan Stratton Treadway wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 16:17:00 -0500, Nathan Stratton Treadway wrote:
but mutt also processes backslashes when it is parsing the command line
defining the expresion -- so you may need to quote the backslashes.
Thank you I will try this. Waiting for new spam to show up.
In your RE expression you have two literal periods (m. and
.com) plus one meta-period (.*). One of the literal periods
is escaped (\.com) the other is not.
Both literal periods should be the same (escaped or not escaped)
and the
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 02:54:59AM -0500, Jon LaBadie wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 07:15:13AM +, John Long wrote:
In your RE expression you have two literal periods (m. and
.com) plus one meta-period (.*). One of the literal periods
is escaped (\.com) the other is not.
Both literal
* On 09 Dec 2014, John Long wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 02:54:59AM -0500, Jon LaBadie wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 07:15:13AM +, John Long wrote:
In your RE expression you have two literal periods (m. and
.com) plus one meta-period (.*). One of the literal periods
is escaped
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 20:39:16 +, John Long wrote:
score '~i @m\..*\.com'-
matches on
Message-ID: 5486ad9f.8186460a.0aee.1...@mx.google.com
You want the actual regex to contain backslashed period characters...
but mutt also processes backslashes when it is
Hi, answers within
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 02:53:50PM -0600, David Champion wrote:
* On 09 Dec 2014, John Long wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 02:54:59AM -0500, Jon LaBadie wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 07:15:13AM +, John Long wrote:
In your RE expression you have two literal
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 16:17:00 -0500, Nathan Stratton Treadway wrote:
but mutt also processes backslashes when it is parsing the command line
defining the expresion -- so you may need to quote the backslashes.
(Here's the explaination of this topic from the mutt manual, near the
bottom of the
* On 09 Dec 2014, John Long wrote:
The messages seem to all have message-ids in the form
bunchofch...@m.something.com
You'll need to be much more specific if you want help writing a matching
regex. Is something a semantic variable or literal? What does
bunchofchars look like?
From all I
The pron spammers are at it again on a bunch of email lists I subscribe
to. I noticed most if not all of this reprehensible lot is using mail hosts
that use email addresses and also generate a message-id in the form of
Obnoxious Spammer id...@m.something.com
I have tried a few combinations but
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 07:15:13AM +, John Long wrote:
The pron spammers are at it again on a bunch of email lists I subscribe
to. I noticed most if not all of this reprehensible lot is using mail hosts
that use email addresses and also generate a message-id in the form of
Obnoxious
14 matches
Mail list logo
