On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:27:13PM -0400, Celejar wrote: > On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:15:16 -0700 > John L Fjellstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Celejar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > The best practice when filtering list traffic is apparently to use the > > > 'list-id' header (to catch 'to', 'cc', etc). But the best > > > practice is also apparently to undigest digest emails with formail > > > (greatly easing reading, threading and replying), which doesn't > > > preserve the 'list-id' header. Is there no choice, then, but to filter > > > by 'to' (and 'cc' etc.)? > > > > Couldn't you reinsert the list-id header? That is, pull out the list-id > > header before undigesting, store it, undigest, insert list-id. > > Thanks. That seems to be the consensus solution, to either do that, or > quickly and dirtily to just insert a hard-coded list header.
You didn't mention how you're doing the filtering, but procmail uses a special pattern to match stuff, e.g., maybe something like: * \/List_id: .* then later, formail -a "$MATCH" ... I'm no procmail expert, but have several entries doing this sort of thing. It generally takes me much trial & error to work out the procmail code, but then it just runs behind the scenes and I forget about it. OT, but one concern I have is that stuff like this gets added to .procmailrc but rarely if ever gets taken out. Sometime it might be nice to move to a more transparent, less arcane filtering system, and maybe such a system could keep track of how often patterns actually get hit. Ken -- Ken Irving, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
