On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Patrick Shanahan <p...@opensuse.org> wrote:
> * Xu Wang <xuwang...@gmail.com> [05-20-16 16:14]:
>> procmail seems so useful and I do not know of a good replacement for
>> some of its resources. I use the formail tool quite oft
* Xu Wang <xuwang...@gmail.com> [05-20-16 16:14]:
> procmail seems so useful and I do not know of a good replacement for
> some of its resources. I use the formail tool quite often.
>
> I find it strange that such a useful tool never gained a maintainer.
> Here is a u
procmail seems so useful and I do not know of a good replacement for
some of its resources. I use the formail tool quite often.
I find it strange that such a useful tool never gained a maintainer.
Here is a useful message:
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=141634350915839=2
but to me it explains
Hello,
I am using the inbuilt pop and smtp for gmail.
Is there a way to forward all received emails from pop server to
procmail instead of putting those to the spoolfile?
Thanks
Sri
* Srikrishan Malik srikrishanma...@gmail.com [06-24-14 02:02]:
I am using the inbuilt pop and smtp for gmail.
Is there a way to forward all received emails from pop server to
procmail instead of putting those to the spoolfile?
Not directly using mutt, but a simple matter using fetchmail
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 04:47:45PM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Srikrishan Malik srikrishanma...@gmail.com [06-24-14 02:02]:
I am using the inbuilt pop and smtp for gmail.
Is there a way to forward all received emails from pop server to
procmail instead of putting those
from pop server to
procmail instead of putting those to the spoolfile?
Not directly using mutt, but a simple matter using fetchmail or another
mail retrieval agent. I use fetchmail.
Yeah, I shifted to that mode last night.
I tried to change code to call procmail after a mail is fetched
from pop server to
procmail instead of putting those to the spoolfile?
Not directly using mutt, but a simple matter using fetchmail or another
mail retrieval agent. I use fetchmail.
Yeah, I shifted to that mode last night.
I tried to change code to call procmail after a mail
Most importantly, there is a nice procmail recipe in that procmailrc that
creates list inboxes automatically
as soon as you sign up for a mailing list, procmail will create it as a new
inbox for you automatically... pretty cool
:0:
* ^((List-Id|X-(Mailing-)?List):(.*[]\/[^]*))
{
LISTID
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:37:04PM +, Tony's unattended mail wrote:
However, I find dovecot deliver (which uses the sieve language
for filtering) to be much more readable/writable than procmail.
Sieve does not include regular expressions -- I shit you not.
Dovecote needs regular
However, I find dovecot deliver (which uses the sieve language
for filtering) to be much more readable/writable than procmail.
Sieve does not include regular expressions -- I shit you not.
Dovecote needs regular expression capability to be shoe-horned in by
some hokey plugin. Regular
/ Tony's unattended mail wrote on Sat 10.Nov'12 at 22:37:04 + /
However, I find dovecot deliver (which uses the sieve language
for filtering) to be much more readable/writable than procmail.
Sieve does not include regular expressions -- I shit you not.
Dovecote needs regular
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:17:35AM +0200, Nikola Petrov wrote:
No it doesn't deliver them to you. It sort of filters them online on the
server. You can then use something like offlineimap to deliver them
locally to you. I use imapfilter + offlineimap + notmuch + mutt and I am
far from happy
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 02:49:48PM +0200, Nikola Petrov wrote:
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 11:17:06PM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:17:35AM +0200, Nikola Petrov wrote:
No it doesn't deliver them to you. It sort of filters them online on the
server. You can then use
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:17:35AM +0200, Nikola Petrov wrote:
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 05:35:45PM +, Chris Green wrote:
I am using imapfilter with lua configuration file for my imap account.
That does the job for me and I like the fact that I declare my filters
with actual code(be it
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 04:33:58PM -0600, David Champion wrote:
* On 07 Nov 2012, Derek Martin wrote:
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:48:08PM +, Chris Green wrote:
server retrying if my SMTP server isn't running (or connected). That's
one of the reasons I'd quite like to move away from
/ Chris Green wrote on Thu 8.Nov'12 at 10:51:59 + /
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 04:33:58PM -0600, David Champion wrote:
* On 07 Nov 2012, Derek Martin wrote:
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:48:08PM +, Chris Green wrote:
server retrying if my SMTP server isn't running (or connected).
fetchmail + maildrop works for me.
--
Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer mw...@iupui.edu
Asking whether markets are efficient is like asking whether people are smart.
pgpGksnsN8kgQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 10:48:45AM -0600, Derek Martin wrote:
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15:41PM +, Chris Green wrote:
What does everyone else here do for collecting mail and filtering mail
with mutt?
Fetchmail and procmail. Ugly, but ubiquitous and reliable. A friend
pointed me
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 01:03:07PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
Hi Chris, personally, i'd stick with what your current set-up.
Ditto. I don't currently do this but that's only because port 25 is
blocked by my ISP. I've run my mail this way before and would do it
again if it were a
* Derek Martin inva...@pizzashack.org [11-08-12 12:06]:
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 01:03:07PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
Hi Chris, personally, i'd stick with what your current set-up.
Ditto. I don't currently do this but that's only because port 25 is
blocked by my ISP. I've run my
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:06:35AM -0600, Derek Martin wrote:
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 01:03:07PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
Hi Chris, personally, i'd stick with what your current set-up.
Ditto. I don't currently do this but that's only because port 25 is
blocked by my ISP. I've run
/ Chris Green wrote on Thu 8.Nov'12 at 18:13:10 + /
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:06:35AM -0600, Derek Martin wrote:
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 01:03:07PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
Hi Chris, personally, i'd stick with what your current set-up.
Ditto. I don't currently do this
work better. I can stay with my existing filter system but, again, if I
can consolidate things into one, easier to maintain, chunk then I'd be
happy.
I *don't* like procmail configuration files, they're one of the reasons
I wrote my own.
What does everyone else here do for collecting mail
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15:41PM +, Chris Green wrote:
What does everyone else here do for collecting mail and filtering mail
with mutt?
Fetchmail and procmail. Ugly, but ubiquitous and reliable. A friend
pointed me at something better for mail filtering, but I can't
recall what
program
than so much the better but I'm happy with two programs if that would
work better. I can stay with my existing filter system but, again, if I
can consolidate things into one, easier to maintain, chunk then I'd be
happy.
I *don't* like procmail configuration files, they're one
be
happy.
I *don't* like procmail configuration files, they're one of the reasons
I wrote my own.
What does everyone else here do for collecting mail and filtering mail
with mutt?
I am using imapfilter with lua configuration file for my imap account.
That does the job for me
On Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15 PM +, Chris Green wrote:
I *don't* like procmail configuration files, they're one of the reasons
I wrote my own.
What does everyone else here do for collecting mail and filtering mail
with mutt?
I use getmail and dovecot deliver. Getmail is great, fast
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 01:04:17PM -0500, Tim Gray wrote:
On Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15 PM +, Chris Green wrote:
I *don't* like procmail configuration files, they're one of the reasons
I wrote my own.
What does everyone else here do for collecting mail and filtering mail
with mutt?
I use
/ Nikola Petrov wrote on Wed 7.Nov'12 at 19:17:46 +0200 /
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15:41PM +, Chris Green wrote:
I currently have my mail delivered to my desktop system using SMTP as
the system is on all the time and has a static IP.
However I always get paranoid when I
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:16:42PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
/ Nikola Petrov wrote on Wed 7.Nov'12 at 19:17:46 +0200 /
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15:41PM +, Chris Green wrote:
I currently have my mail delivered to my desktop system using SMTP as
the system is on all the time
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 10:48:45AM -0600, Derek Martin wrote:
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 02:15:41PM +, Chris Green wrote:
What does everyone else here do for collecting mail and filtering mail
with mutt?
Fetchmail and procmail. Ugly, but ubiquitous and reliable.
Same here. I keep
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:48:08PM +, Chris Green wrote:
No specific protective measures at all, it just relies on the sending
server retrying if my SMTP server isn't running (or connected). That's
one of the reasons I'd quite like to move away from SMTP. It *should*
be OK but I'm
, if I
can consolidate things into one, easier to maintain, chunk then I'd be
happy.
I *don't* like procmail configuration files, they're one of the reasons
I wrote my own.
What does everyone else here do for collecting mail and filtering mail
with mutt?
I am
* On 07 Nov 2012, Derek Martin wrote:
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:48:08PM +, Chris Green wrote:
server retrying if my SMTP server isn't running (or connected). That's
one of the reasons I'd quite like to move away from SMTP. It *should*
be OK but I'm relying on the other end to behave
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 04:33:58PM -0600, David Champion wrote:
* On 07 Nov 2012, Derek Martin wrote:
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:48:08PM +, Chris Green wrote:
server retrying if my SMTP server isn't running (or connected). That's
one of the reasons I'd quite like to move away from
/ David Champion wrote on Wed 7.Nov'12 at 16:33:58 -0600 /
* On 07 Nov 2012, Derek Martin wrote:
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:48:08PM +, Chris Green wrote:
server retrying if my SMTP server isn't running (or connected). That's
one of the reasons I'd quite like to move away from
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 11:21:59PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
Yes i think the benefits of using your own smtp delivery are worth it.
I can only agree. And to avoid issues when my landline is down I have a VM
on a big hoster that on one side delivers all my locally generated mails to
avoid
this all in one program
| than so much the better but I'm happy with two programs if that would
| work better. I can stay with my existing filter system but, again, if I
| can consolidate things into one, easier to maintain, chunk then I'd be
| happy.
|
| I *don't* like procmail configuration files
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 04:33:58PM -0600, David Champion wrote:
I've used IMAP pickup in the past and it's OK for some IMAP servers. A
year or two ago my employer moved my mailbox to MS Exchange. Exchange
doesn't (necessarily?) hand you the exact e-mail it received. It
parses incoming mail,
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 01:06:54AM +0100, Andre Klärner wrote:
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 11:21:59PM +, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
Yes i think the benefits of using your own smtp delivery are worth it.
I can only agree. And to avoid issues when my landline is down I have a VM
on a big
mail and filtering mail
with mutt?
Fetchmail and procmail. Ugly, but ubiquitous and reliable.
Same here. I keep meaning to hook in an adaptive spam filter, but I
haven't bothered so far. Maybe mutt just makes it so easy to quickly
triage my mail that it hasn't seemed worth it.
/me
* On 07 Nov 2012, Jeremy Kitchen wrote:
I haven't had it break crypto, but I'm one of 2 people at the company
doing pgp signatures and both of us send *only* text/plain.
My memory is fuzzy but I think it was more complex multipart signed
messages that it broke.
I have had it give me
Hi Will,
Thanks again for your ideas.
On 04/10/12 16:04, Will Fiveash wrote:
I use procmail and some shell scripts to basically do the same. Here is
my .procmail rule:
# Process killed threads, save killed threads in killedthreads mbox
:0:
* ? $HOME/bin/isthreadkilled
killedthreads
I
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:12:16PM +0200, Alexis Letessier wrote:
Hi Will,
Thanks again for your ideas.
On 04/10/12 16:04, Will Fiveash wrote:
I use procmail and some shell scripts to basically do the same. Here is
my .procmail rule:
# Process killed threads, save killed threads
You're right Will,
I have used tr and sed expressions from Marco and only a part of your procmail
recipe (* ? script).
Thanks to you two then ;)
On 11/10/12 15:30, Will Fiveash wrote:
I don't see my script stuff in there so I'm thinking you probably need
to redirect your thanks to Marco
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 22:43:39 PM +0200, Alexis Letessier wrote:
You're right Will,
I have used tr and sed expressions from Marco and only a part of
your procmail recipe (* ? script).
Thanks to you two then ;)
You're welcome! Glad the stuff was useful. For the record, the
procmail recipe
M. Fioretti wrote:
You're welcome! Glad the stuff was useful. For the record, the
procmail recipe in my blog post is NOT mine (as duly noted in the post
itself and/or in the code). Basically, I had the idea, then whined on
the procmail list about it until Sean Straw, procmail guru, became
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 14:39:28 PM -0700, J Wermont wrote:
M. Fioretti wrote:
You're welcome! Glad the stuff was useful. For the record, the
procmail recipe in my blog post is NOT mine (as duly noted in the post
itself and/or in the code). Basically, I had the idea, then whined
that i already filtered out.
Is this a strange idea or should i change my workflow? Any ideas on how
this could be implemented?
I do the same thing with a custom procmail recipe explained here on my blog:
http://freesoftware.zona-m.net/how-ignore-uninteresting-threads-in-mailing-lists
Hello,
I receive all my emails in one box and filter out non interesting mails
in an Archive with mutt. I have some rules to dispatch mailing lists
directly in some mailboxes with procmail but my rules are quite simple.
I would like threads that i previously dispatched in my archive
mailbox
do the same thing with a custom procmail recipe explained here on my blog:
http://freesoftware.zona-m.net/how-ignore-uninteresting-threads-in-mailing-lists/
Marco
http://mfioretti.com
Hi Marco,
Your two blog articles on the subject are really helpful.
I will try to adapt the procmail recipe to match message-id based on
notmuch search results in order to filter out unwanted threads:
~ % notmuch search --output=files 'id:14d85b32...@dem006.intra.tt' or
'id:ADFADSFADF'
/home
change my workflow? Any ideas on how
this could be implemented?
I do the same thing with a custom procmail recipe explained here on my blog:
http://freesoftware.zona-m.net/how-ignore-uninteresting-threads-in-mailing-lists/
I use procmail and some shell scripts to basically do the same. Here
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 11:38:37AM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Gérard Robin g.rob...@free.fr [09-10-11 09:54]:
Effectively I had in my .procmailrc : DEFAULT=/var/spool/mail/user1
but perhaps user1 can't write in /var/spool/mail.
do: ls -d /var/spool/mail
/var/spool/mail should
/U11 and when I downloaded
my messages the messages from the list mutt-users were lost.
Is it possible to avoid losing the messages in this case ? i.e. when the
path doesn't exist.
Read your .procmailrc file. You will se this:
# Messages that fall through all your procmail recipes
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 11:02:32AM +0100, Athanasius wrote:
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 11:02:32 +0100
From: Athanasius m...@miggy.org
To: mutt-users@mutt.org
Subject: Re: bad path given to procmail
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 01:24:15PM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote
* Gérard Robin g.rob...@free.fr [09-10-11 09:54]:
Effectively I had in my .procmailrc : DEFAULT=/var/spool/mail/user1
but perhaps user1 can't write in /var/spool/mail.
do: ls -d /var/spool/mail
/var/spool/mail should have rwx for everyone.
--
(paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield,
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 11:38:37AM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 11:38:37 -0400
From: Patrick Shanahan ptilopt...@gmail.com
To: mutt-users@mutt.org
Subject: Re: bad path given to procmail
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
* Gérard Robin g.rob...@free.fr [09-10-11 09
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 11:02:32AM +0100, Athanasius wrote:
..snip..
I'd not come across this before, so checked... and in my setup the
output for 'default INBOX' is incorrect. It states:
Default rcfile: $HOME/.procmailrc
It may be writable by
Hello Gérard Robin,
Am 2011-09-09 13:11:52, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
Hello,
I have put a path like this in procmailrc:
:0
* ^tomutt-us...@mutt.org
This is wrong. If you mean the Macro, it must be
* ^to_mutt-us...@mutt.org
but is you mean the To: header then it has to be
Hello,
I have put a path like this in procmailrc:
:0
* ^tomutt-us...@mutt.org
MUTT/U11/mutt-`date +%m-%y`
but I had not yet created the directory MUTT/U11 and when I downloaded
my messages the messages from the list mutt-users were lost.
Is it possible to avoid losing the messages in this case
.
Is it possible to avoid losing the messages in this case ? i.e. when the
path doesn't exist.
The *only* way I know of to loose mail via procmail is to direct to
/dev/null. You have the mail somewhere.
Your recipe is faulty and probably did not handle the mail from
mutt-users,
* ^TO.*mutt
-users were lost.
Is it possible to avoid losing the messages in this case ? i.e. when the
path doesn't exist.
Read your .procmailrc file. You will se this:
# Messages that fall through all your procmail recipes are delivered
# to your default INBOX. To find out yours, run 'procmail -v'
--
Bob
fetch the messages by using
[ '~/.fetchmailrc' ]
poll pop.gmail.com proto IMAPS
usermygmailusername
passmypasswordhere
is localusr
folder INBOX
options mda /usr/bin/procmail -a INBOX -d %T
poll pop.gmail.com proto
Hello Harry Strongburg,
Am 2010-08-16 05:13:28, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
This is wonderful, it works exactly how I want! I had to edit the config
a bit to get it to work (maybe you did this intentionally to get me to
learn a bit? :)). Here is the edited working config (procmail worked
into the archive of the procmail list, he would
know how to make files read. Including modifying the courrierimapuidb
That is false attribution. Erik proposed a possible workaround.
It is in fact Yue Wu who has the problem, and therefore might wish to
consult the archives.
That can be seen in the archives
not let all redelivered
mails become into the unread status. I'm using maildir format, and tried
with
the following script:
for j in $(find $2 -type d | grep cur) ; do (
cd $j ;
for i in * ;
do cat $i | formail -ds procmail ;
done
On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 10:48:05AM +0800, Yue Wu wrote:
In my case, after re-procmail, every email will be unread, I can't recorgnize
which are those I've read, I have to look those emails one by one and recall
if it's really read or unread by me.
In the script or procmail recipe that refiles
Hello Christian Ebert,
Am 2010-08-05 15:45:48, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
As Erik is using Maildir even that wouldn't help much as the
messages would be delivered to Maildir/new/ .
And if he had looked into the archive of the procmail list, he would
know how to make files read. Including
Hello Yue Wu,
Am 2010-08-05 21:18:45, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
for j in $(find $2 -type d | grep cur) ; do (
cd $j ;
for i in * ;
do cat $i | formail -ds procmail ;
done) ;
done
But after redeliverd, all emails
* Yue Wu vano...@gmail.com [08-05-10 08:39]:
Sometimes I want to filter my emails with new rule of procmail, archived
list has the way to re-procmail, but all re-procmailed mails will be at
the new unread status. My question is, how to re-procmail without
changing the read/unread status
On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 08:50:22AM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Yue Wu vano...@gmail.com [08-05-10 08:39]:
Sometimes I want to filter my emails with new rule of procmail, archived
list has the way to re-procmail, but all re-procmailed mails will be at
the new unread status. My question
(
cd $j ;
for i in * ;
do cat $i | formail -ds procmail ;
done) ;
done
But after redeliverd, all emails are new, i.e. unread in mutt, that's not what
I want.
Since they have been redelivered, it's hard to blame mutt for indicating
that. Since
:
for j in $(find $2 -type d | grep cur) ; do (
cd $j ;
for i in * ;
do cat $i | formail -ds procmail ;
done) ;
done
But after redeliverd, all emails are new, i.e. unread in mutt, that's not
what
I want.
Since they have been
status. I'm using maildir format, and tried
with
the following script:
for j in $(find $2 -type d | grep cur) ; do (
cd $j ;
for i in * ;
do cat $i | formail -ds procmail ;
done) ;
done
But after redeliverd, all emails
On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 08:34:01AM +0800, Yue Wu wrote:
Orgnizing all mails to be unread then mark the old ones to be read is
very tedious if mails is many.
Really?
How about T ~N ;N ?
Or in long form:
tag-pattern
pattern = new messages = ~N
tag-prefixtoggle-new
Optionally use ~O for old
pattern = new messages = ~N
tag-prefixtoggle-new
Optionally use ~O for old messages.
In my case, after re-procmail, every email will be unread, I can't recorgnize
which are those I've read, I have to look those emails one by one and recall
if it's really read or unread by me.
--
Regards,
Yue Wu
On 2010-07-23, He Wen wrote:
Hi, Every one!
I try to use notify-send to send a message to my desktop when a new mail
arrives, but i find notify-send dosen't work with procmail:
In my procmailrc, I have:
# notification
:0 ic:
| play /usr/share/sounds/gnome/default/alerts/drip.ogg
-send, but I imagine that it's an X
application and needs to know the identity of the display on which
to display itself. The process that runs procmail is not associated
with any display, so notify-send doesn't know what display to use.
You might try executing
echo $DISPLAY
at the shell
Hi, Every one!
I try to use notify-send to send a message to my desktop when a new mail
arrives, but i find notify-send dosen't work with procmail:
In my procmailrc, I have:
# notification
:0 ic:
| play /usr/share/sounds/gnome/default/alerts/drip.ogg; notify-send -i
'evolution' New Mail
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 12:03:26PM +0800, He Wen wrote:
Hi, Every one!
I try to use notify-send to send a message to my desktop when a new mail
arrives, but i find notify-send dosen't work with procmail:
In my procmailrc, I have:
# notification
:0 ic:
| play /usr/share/sounds/gnome/default
On Sun, Apr 04, 2010 at 07:08:18AM +0800, Yue Wu wrote:
Hi, list,
Is there one modernized procmail? The biggest complain on procmail is that it
doesn't support multibyte charactors at all(w/o dirty trick). Or maybe there
is one better replacement for filtering the mails? I'm seaking
Hi, list,
Is there one modernized procmail? The biggest complain on procmail is that it
doesn't support multibyte charactors at all(w/o dirty trick). Or maybe there
is one better replacement for filtering the mails? I'm seaking the infos to
make my mutt work with imap(offlineimap?).
--
Regards
On Sun, Apr 04, 2010 at 07:08:18AM +0800, Yue Wu wrote:
Hi, list,
Is there one modernized procmail? The biggest complain on procmail is that it
doesn't support multibyte charactors at all(w/o dirty trick). Or maybe there
is one better replacement for filtering the mails? I'm seaking
/new - as an example?
Should anyone feel that this should be better posted to a procmail
support, please point me to the correct place for signup.
thanks
--
Tim
t...@johnsons-web.com
http://www.akwebsoft.com
* Tim Johnson on Sunday, June 07, 2009 at 16:50:38 -0800
In the past, when I used mutt, I was using mbox type mailboxes.
Never had any problems with recipes like this:
## begin example
:0:
:0
with Maildir you don't need locking, but
* ^(From|Cc|To):.*gnome
/home/tim/Mail/Gnome
* Christian Ebert blacktr...@gmx.net [090607 17:11]:
:0
with Maildir you don't need locking, but
* ^(From|Cc|To):.*gnome
/home/tim/Mail/Gnome
/home/tim/Mail/Gnome/
^
the terminating directory slash.
You might want to poke around a bit in man 5 procmailrc for
On 1 Jan 2009 23:29 -0500, by r...@panix.com (rj):
#
# Generate a Lines: header (needed for maildir mailbox
# format) using procmail's scoring mechanism. Only
# message-body lines are counted (not the headers):
It doesn't answer your
On 2009-01-01, rj r...@panix.com wrote:
When I edit a message, the edited version of it appears as a separate, new
message in mutt's index, but without a Lines: header.
So I pipe it through procmail where I have this in my procmailrc
When I edit a message, the edited version of it appears as a separate, new
message in mutt's index, but without a Lines: header.
So I pipe it through procmail where I have this in my procmailrc:
#
# Generate a Lines: header (needed
a temporary log.
FINAL_LOG=$MAILDIR/log# - Append here, via TRAP, at process exit:
TRAP='procmail -p DEFAULT=$FINAL_LOG /dev/null $LOGFILE rm -f $LOGFILE'
Off-topic, but an easier way to log everything to one file which leaves your
TRAP variable free for other purposes is to use
On Sat, 13 Sep 2008, Aleksandar D. Balalovski wrote:
hello, I've been using Mutt for half a year now, everything was fine.
Yesterday I changed some of the recipes in procmailrc and since than
fetchmail/procmail won't put the mail in the preferred mailbox. It
puts it in /var/spool/mail
hello, I've been using Mutt for half a year now, everything was fine.
Yesterday I changed some of the recipes in procmailrc and since than
fetchmail/procmail won't put the mail in the preferred mailbox. It
puts it in /var/spool/mail/myusername.
This is my ~/.muttrc:
http://pastebin.com/m4ff673db
On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 02:53:08PM +0200, Aleksandar D. Balalovski wrote:
hello, I've been using Mutt for half a year now, everything was fine.
Yesterday I changed some of the recipes in procmailrc and since than
fetchmail/procmail won't put the mail in the preferred mailbox. It
puts
* Aleksandar D. Balalovski [EMAIL PROTECTED] [09-13-08 08:55]:
hello, I've been using Mutt for half a year now, everything was fine.
Yesterday I changed some of the recipes in procmailrc and since than
fetchmail/procmail won't put the mail in the preferred mailbox. It
puts it in /var/spool
On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 02:53:08PM +0200, Aleksandar D. Balalovski wrote:
hello, I've been using Mutt for half a year now, everything was fine.
Yesterday I changed some of the recipes in procmailrc and since than
fetchmail/procmail won't put the mail in the preferred mailbox. It
puts
On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 07:15:42AM -0600, Michael wrote:
On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 02:53:08PM +0200, Aleksandar D. Balalovski wrote:
hello, I've been using Mutt for half a year now, everything was fine.
Yesterday I changed some of the recipes in procmailrc and since than
fetchmail/procmail
++ 13/09/08 09:20 -0400 - Patrick Shanahan:
Well, your procmail recipe will not work as the matches begin at the
start of the recipe, ie: ^TO
and your recipe will not match a normal To: Header.
and will not deliver to Maildir type mailboxes, needs trailing /.
:0:
* ^TO_.*lugola-info-center
* Rejo Zenger [EMAIL PROTECTED] [09-13-08 15:15]:
++ 13/09/08 09:20 -0400 - Patrick Shanahan:
Well, your procmail recipe will not work as the matches begin at the
start of the recipe, ie: ^TO
and your recipe will not match a normal To: Header.
and will not deliver to Maildir type mailboxes
1 - 100 of 597 matches
Mail list logo
