On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 01:08 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 February 2009, SM wrote:
> > You could add a rule to catch the "no To-header" comment.
>
> Humm, if it can't find the unlisted stuff in the same line...
There is no line break. Just as I suspected yesterday, I still suspect
your copy-n-paste method to have inserted the newline. Procmail works
with the raw message and doesn't look at the rendered KMail display.
Btw, procmail concatenates multi-line headers and handles it
transparently for you anyway.
> Would this work?
>
> :0:
> *^*no To-header on input*
> /dev/null
Nope, it wouldn't. Procmail uses REs, not shell-style globbing.
If you don't want to anchor your condition REs at the beginning of the
line, don't. IMHO you'd better do though, for multiple reasons -- speed,
and not to match any arbitrary header but the To header only.
That said, I do agree with Martin and John. The absence of a real
recipient in the To header is NOT sufficient to silently discard mail.
Even more so, since the POP3 server appears to have rewritten that
stuff.
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
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; }}}
