gmane.mail.procmail

Re: Please fix obsolete address inhttp://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html

LuKreme — 2013-06-19T07:49:40

A: You're wrong
Q: I've never found that to be true
A: Because it make following messages more difficult
Q: Why is top-posting evil?`

Re: Please fix obsolete address inhttp://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html

Julian H. Stacey — 2013-06-18T13:05:09

[Sorry, sending delayed by a mail config change my local end]


Thanks Erik, Bart, Sean,

Hopefully Sean will receive a positive reply.


Yours ideal :-)

Cheers,
Julian
- -- 
Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com
 Reply below not above, like a play script.  Indent old text with "> ".
 Send plain text.  No quoted-printable, HTML, base64, multipart/alternative.

Re: Please fix obsolete address inhttp://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html

Professional Software Engineering — 2013-06-16T19:42:03

Many of the participants on this list have been on it for over a 
decade (and some have been using procmail for two or more), and thus 
would likely be fairlt oblivious to changes in how to get onto the 
list, not needing to do that themselves.


The official listadmin for the procmail list is a staffer at the 
Univertify of Aachen, and happens to NOT be a participant on this 
list.  Of course, the official listadmin can't help anyone who isn't 
mailing the correct list/listadmin address, so they're not 
necessarily in a position to do much to resolve the problem at hand.


I have sent, under separate cover, correspondance to the two 
principals of procmail to suggest that the website and procmail 
manpages perhaps be updated.


Nominally, rather than accepting mail at 
procmail-request< at >informatik.RWTH-Aachen.de, if the address is in fact 
defunct, an SMTP access rule can be set up for it (by an aachen mail 
admin) to bounce incoming messages with a reference to the new 
mailman interface.  No lost souls, n

Re: Please fix obsolete address inhttp://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html

Bart Schaefer — 2013-06-16T17:24:43

On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 1:57 AM, Erik Christiansen
<dvalin< at >internode.on.net> wrote:

I received it, both times.

Although the registrar for procmail.org is cuci.nl (and the
registration expires in about 5 months), the website is hosted at
Gustavus Adolphus College (gac.edu) in Minnesota.  I believe Philip
Guenther used to work there when he was maintaining procmail; he was
reachable as guenther< at >sendmail.com as recently as I know about.  He
hasn't responded about procmail much in some years, but might be
willing/able to tell someone how to get access to the website.

Re: Please fix obsolete address inhttp://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html

Julian H. Stacey — 2013-06-16T14:06:51

Yes, Recursive Catch 22, one need to be on list to get that header,
or find an owner address or subscribe mechanism detailed on web, 
but http://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html points at wrong address.



Probably, I tried various addresses, all black holes bar one, but
he/she's bound to be on this list too, & here cc'd webmaster< at >procmail.org.



Yes,
(It's quite possible for a list to operate, yet a sub/unsub mechanism
to be broken, but in this case once postmaster < at > Aachen found 
right address, I subscribed via sub. mechanism, so that works
too, so it seems to be just http://www.procmail.org needs fixing).



There's a thought ! Hopefully not. 
(PS no big river in Aachen where procmail list server is)



Postmaster < at > Aachen is a she,  I got the impression from her that
http://www.procmail.org pages were not her area.  Presumably that's
webmaster< at >procmail.org who was one othe authors of procmail, cant
remember name, he might be webmaster< at >procmail.org cd'd here for:


Please correct
        procmail-request

Re: Please fix obsolete address inhttp://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html

Erik Christiansen — 2013-06-16T08:57:11

Trying again. This list now seems to have problems taking posts from
long-term subscribers as well.

----- Forwarded message from Erik Christiansen <dvalin< at >internode.on.net> -----

Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 22:33:20 +1000
From: Erik Christiansen <dvalin< at >internode.on.net>
To: procmail< at >lists.RWTH-Aachen.de
Subject: Re: Please fix obsolete address in http://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html
In-Reply-To: <201306151132.r5FBWmUg002413< at >fire.js.berklix.net>
References: <1371240999.3390< at >lofcom.com>
<201306151132.r5FBWmUg002413< at >fire.js.berklix.net>
Reply-To: dvalin< at >internode.on.net

On 15.06.13 13:32, Julian H. Stacey wrote:

Perhaps we've devolved into a closed community, then. The List-Subscribe
URL in the list mail headers seems to work fine:

http://mailman.rwth-aachen.de/mailman/listinfo/procmail

which also identifies a list administrator at the bottom of the page.
(I guess he's one of those you've tried to contact.)

...

The list seems to be ticking along, but until you report, we don't know
whether we have a list

Re: Please fix obsolete addressinhttp://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html

2013-06-16T04:36:45

Julian H. Stacey wrote ..


   Rather than forward a private message to a public list, you should now just be quiet. We subscribed to this list to discuss procmail, not to be lectured to about non-relevancies by someone without enough netiquette to publish copyrighted material without permission.

   Again, *plonk*
____________________________________________________________
procmail mailing list   Procmail homepage: http://www.procmail.org/
procmail< at >lists.RWTH-Aachen.de
http://mailman.rwth-aachen.de/mailman/listinfo/procmail

Re: Please fix obsolete address inhttp://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html

Erik Christiansen — 2013-06-15T12:33:20

Perhaps we've devolved into a closed community, then. The List-Subscribe
URL in the list mail headers seems to work fine:

http://mailman.rwth-aachen.de/mailman/listinfo/procmail

which also identifies a list administrator at the bottom of the page.
(I guess he's one of those you've tried to contact.)

...

The list seems to be ticking along, but until you report, we don't know
whether we have a list administrator who's still breathing. (It might
just be the northern hemisphere summer which is at fault - with everyone
out camping in the mountains, or filling sandbags in central Europe.)


Uh - huh. Probably has to hike three days to reach the admin, up in the
hills. I'd preferably be consuming Bratwurst and a Weissbier on the
terrace at that place half way up the hill to Schloss Neuschwanstein, if
I were in that hemisphere now.


So he'd be the one to hand out edit permission to some hardy volunteer,
to run a handmower over the long grass on the web page, perhaps?
(Assuming the list admin has left town for

Re: Please fix obsolete address inhttp://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html

Julian H. Stacey — 2013-06-15T11:32:48

charlie< at >lofcom.com wrote off list Fri, 14 Jun 2013 16:16:39 -0400 (EDT) 


No thanks ;-)



Rather than mail foolish sarcasm, you should have _Thought_, extrapolated,
& realised:

- The procmail.org community have [had] an admin problem for {Overflow}
  time, preventing subscriptions; 
- The procmail.org community have an obsolete web disrupting subscriptions; 
- The procmail.org community have an obsolete & now dead owner< at > address,
  preventing error reports.
- As all findable email addresses < at >procmail.org to file mail list error 
  were useless, there was nowhere else to file than here. 
- The procmail.org community need to alert & volunteer to help 
  whoever does admin for procmail.org, as work overflowed & is not done.

History:

- I searched www.procmail.org
- I found an address to subscribe
- That page was obscured with info about some list manager software that
  should be seperated on to another page. That info distracts, I
  suspected it was irrelevant, & in retrospect it Is irrelevant &/or obsolet

Please fix obsolete address in http://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html

Julian H. Stacey — 2013-06-14T16:07:28

Hi procmail< at >lists.RWTH-Aachen.de
cc: bunsen< at >rz.rwth-aachen.de,
Stefanie Scholten <steffi< at >informatik.rwth-aachen.de>,
webmaster< at >www.procmail.org

In 
http://www.procmail.org/era/lists.html
Please Remove Obsolete references to 
procmail-request< at >informatik.RWTH-Aachen.de
& replace with reference to
https://mailman.rwth-aachen.de/mailman/listinfo/procmail

Thanks to Stefanie postmaster< at > Aachen
who indentified the old address was overflowing & obsolete & will be deleted.

Cheers,
Julian

Re: generate line number in log files

2013-05-05T12:26:25

in message <20130505115657.GB1901< at >ratatosk>,
wrote Erik Christiansen thusly...

In which case ...

  # cat -n log

  # less --LINE-NUMBERS log




--

Re: generate line number in log files

Erik Christiansen — 2013-05-05T11:56:58

Line numbers only need to be visible when the file is viewed by a human,
I figure. So, if you're viewing the file in vim:

:set number

That covers the use cases that my imagination offers up.

Erik

Re: generate line number in log files

LuKreme — 2013-05-04T20:31:00

On 04 May 2013, at 09:10 , Eric Smith <es< at >fruitcom.com> wrote:


No, not really.


Sure. just log the filename at the beginning of the file.

LOG="Starting .procmailr"
LOG="Starting .proclistprocess"

etc.

generate line number in log files

Eric Smith — 2013-05-04T15:10:54

Is there any method for having line numbers and script filenames
printed in the procmail log files.

Avoid brute force method of multiple LOG="foo" invocations.

--
Eric Smith

Dealing with list messages that are Cc to you

LuKreme — 2013-03-06T18:44:30

I know we covered this several times many years ago, but at the time my solution was "If it's to my list account and it's not from a list, discard it"

Sadly, that is no longer an option, so I need a way to do the following:

If a message is TO me and ONLY to me, file it.
If a message is to me and ALSO to a list, file it somewhere else (possibly /dev/null :)
If a message is NOT to me, treat it as a list message (that is, let it fall through)

I have all the recipes in place to deal with the list messages.

I though that maybe this,a after all list processing might work:

:0
* 9876543210^1 ! X-Original-To:.*kremels< at >kreme.com
* 9876543210^1 ! TO_kremels< at >kreme\.com
{
   TRAP='mv "$LASTFOLDER" "${LASTFOLDER}:2,S"'

   :0
   .not-to-me/
}

Which should let all the mail that is addressed to my list account fall through to $DEFAULT (the InBox) right?

Re: Procmail with faceless account

Professional Software Engineering — 2013-02-02T14:48:47

You can invoke procmail from an alias (i.e. a non-account mail 
identity).  Mailing lists are/were often configured this way.  I have 
mail on a large site that pumps through procmail in this fashion.


Sounds rather like they're finding more and more things to ask 
someone else to write for them.


See my preceeding comment.  In some circles, this is called "job 
security".  If nobody else wants to learn the environment, and you're 
the one guy who does, seems you're in a good position.


I know there has been interest in having such an interface, but as 
the power of procmail is in being able to run external processes and 
chaining rules, etc, setting up a library and UI with which a 
neophyte could compose worthwhile rules without shooting themselves 
in the foot would be a major undertaking.

---
  Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering

  Procmail disclaimer: <http://www.professional.org/procmail/disclaimer.html>
  Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies.  I'll get my copy from the list.

Procmail with faceless account

Peters, Ron — 2013-02-01T19:04:53

Hi all,

I've been using Procmail for a bunch of years for various reasons. Currently I'm using it as an enterprise tool using a faceless account instead of a real user's account. We've tightly integrated Procmail with our support desk ticketing system. Messages come from various internal and external distribution lists, automated processes, faceless accounts, web based forms, and various IT devices. Based on our rules, we generate tickets that are auto-routed in the ticketing system pre-defined users/groups. Some messages get tickets, some get deleted etc. With this in mind, I have a couple questions for the group here.


1.       Procmail seems to be typically used or end users to manage their own mail. I haven't really run across any sites discussing it being used in this way. Is this a novel approach or have others gone down this path before? It seems that with the way most folks use email today (not from a shell), using Procmail in this way may give it more value and exposure than it's had in the past.

Re: The escaped From bugaboo

Robert Bonomi — 2013-01-15T18:16:55



You misunderstood. The _sequence_of_processing_ is what you have to look in
the source to determine.  WHAT happens is documented -- for _when_ it occurs
one must check the source.


Well, then, obviously, it isn't happening! 
You can disregard everything in this thread,
including the initial report.    <grin>

Re: The escaped From bugaboo

LuKreme — 2013-01-15T17:45:21

On 14 Jan 2013, at 23:58 , Robert Bonomi <bonomi< at >mail.r-bonomi.com> wrote:


MH support was added very early, and maildir support was added in 3.14.


So it's *not* documented.

The only part of the source that seems to deal with escaping the From is formail, and there is quite a lot about how to either escape or not escape 'bogus' from lines. But that makes sense as formal is specifically setup to process mbox files by default.

Re: The escaped From bugaboo

Robert Bonomi — 2013-01-15T06:58:19


for the first statement -- firsthand experience.  I used it when it was
'mbox only'.

For the second, "Use the source, Luke."

Re: The escaped From bugaboo

LuKreme — 2013-01-15T00:36:23


Cite?


Cite? It is certainly not documented n any of the procmail manpages on my system.

For the record, procmail was first released in 1990. Maildir in 1995, and MH folders date from 1979.