Am 2007-03-08 08:50:13, schrieb Arlie Stephens:
> On Mar 08 2007, jeffd wrote:
> > maybe something like this would work?
> > :0:
> > * ^List-Id:.*debian-user\.lists\.debian\.org
> > -debian-user
>
> It looked promising, but didn't work. Thanks anyway.
I LOVE this ultragenial answers!!! G
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 10:44:21AM -0800, Arlie Stephens wrote:
>
[snip procmail log]
>
> In other words, the recipe is correct, but procmail can't deliver to
> the mailbox file, and goes on to try other recipes. Why?
>
> $ ll Mail/-deb*
> -rw--- 1 arlie arlie 52796850 Mar 9 10:27
On Mar 08 2007, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 09:37:50AM -0800, Arlie Stephens wrote:
> > On Mar 08 2007, S Scharf wrote:
> > >
> > > On 3/8/07, Arlie Stephens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >The recipe that *usually* works, indented here for convenient reading.
Arlie Stephens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> I've got a strange problem with my procmail setup, and it's presently
> affecting my handling of the debian-user list. I suspect I've made
> some stupid error I just can't see.
>
> The goal - filter all mailing lists into their own mailboxes,
> particu
On Thu, 08 Mar 2007, Arlie Stephens wrote:
> On Mar 08 2007, jeffd wrote:
> >
> > Arlie Stephens wrote:
>
> > >I've got a strange problem with my procmail setup, and it's presently
> > >affecting my handling of the debian-user list. I suspect I've made
> > >some stupid error I just can't see.
>
On Thu, 8 Mar 2007, Arlie Stephens wrote:
On Mar 08 2007, jeffd wrote:
Arlie Stephens wrote:
I've got a strange problem with my procmail setup, and it's presently
affecting my handling of the debian-user list. I suspect I've made
some stupid error I just can't see.
The goal - filter all
On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 09:37:50AM -0800, Arlie Stephens wrote:
> On Mar 08 2007, S Scharf wrote:
> >
> > On 3/8/07, Arlie Stephens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >The recipe that *usually* works, indented here for convenient reading.
> > >
> > ># Debian User List
> > >:0H:
> > >
On Mar 08 2007, S Scharf wrote:
>
> On 3/8/07, Arlie Stephens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >The recipe that *usually* works, indented here for convenient reading.
> >
> ># Debian User List
> >:0H:
> >* ^(To|Cc):.*debian-user
> >-debian-user
> >
> >
> Does running procmail with
On 3/8/07, Arlie Stephens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi All,
I've got a strange problem with my procmail setup, and it's presently
affecting my handling of the debian-user list. I suspect I've made
some stupid error I just can't see.
The goal - filter all mailing lists into their own mailboxes
On Mar 08 2007, jeffd wrote:
>
> Arlie Stephens wrote:
> >I've got a strange problem with my procmail setup, and it's presently
> >affecting my handling of the debian-user list. I suspect I've made
> >some stupid error I just can't see.
> >
> >The goal - filter all mailing lists into their own ma
Arlie Stephens wrote:
Hi All,
I've got a strange problem with my procmail setup, and it's presently
affecting my handling of the debian-user list. I suspect I've made
some stupid error I just can't see.
The goal - filter all mailing lists into their own mailboxes,
particularly lists like this o
This doesn't belong on deb-sec or deb-laptop. I'm not subscribed to
deb-user, though, so CC please.
On Fri, Jan 02, 2004 at 03:44:01PM -0800, Matthew Whitworth wrote:
> Don't pipe to /dev/null just yet -- I've had five false positives since
> implementing it this morning!
>
> I can provide pr
Incoming from Matthew Whitworth:
> s. keeling wrote:
>
> >:0 HB
> >* 1^0 ()(I will be out of the office|I will respond to your message when I
> >return\.)
> >* 1^0 ^Subject:.*(un)?su(b)?(s)?cribe
> >* 1^0 $ ^^${SPCNL}*(un)?su(b)?scribe
> >* -1^0 ^Subject:.*Re:
> >{
> > LOG="(Un)?[twits] - "
> > :
Don't pipe to /dev/null just yet -- I've had five false positives since
implementing it this morning!
I can provide procmail log entries (although not the actual emails -- I
/dev/null-ed prematurely) if you'd like. I'm going to leave the filter
in place, but pipe them to a folder instead so th
on Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 05:19:57PM -0700, s. keeling ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Incoming from Nunya:
> >
> > Also: If you could post a one-line .muttrc command which would pipe the
> > current message to grep, pull out the message id, and append it to kill,
>
>| egrep '^Message-ID' > ~/.m
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 07:26:30PM -0700, Thanasis Kinias wrote:
> scripsit s. keeling:
> >
> >| egrep '^Message-ID' > ~/.mutt/kill
> >
> > You can stuff some sed in there to clean it up.
>
> Um, `>>' not `>', right? You don't want to clobber the killfile, no?
I ended up with:
| grep -Ei '
scripsit s. keeling:
> Incoming from Nunya:
> >
> > Also: If you could post a one-line .muttrc command which would pipe the
> > current message to grep, pull out the message id, and append it to kill,
>
>| egrep '^Message-ID' > ~/.mutt/kill
>
> You can stuff some sed in there to clean it u
Incoming from Nunya:
>
> Also: If you could post a one-line .muttrc command which would pipe the
> current message to grep, pull out the message id, and append it to kill,
| egrep '^Message-ID' > ~/.mutt/kill
You can stuff some sed in there to clean it up.
--
Any technology distinguishab
Please do. Thanx!
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 12:18:07AM -0500, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
> I have a python script that does some cleanup on messages. I
> currently use it via maildrop's 'xfilter' command. I don't think
> formail would be a good idea here because you run into problems with
> try
On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 07:53:18PM -0600, Greg Norris wrote:
| Anyone have a procmail recipe you'd be willing to share, for sanitizing
| mailing-list subjects? Basically, I'd like to take
|
|Re: Re: Re: [list-name] blah blah
|
| and turn it into
|
|Re: blah blah
|
| I figure that I co
Alec wrote:
> I want send all messages from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to /dev/null except for those
> that contain (case insensitive) "keyword" in its subject. How can I do this?
I haven't tested this, but it should do the job:
:0:
* ^From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* !^Subject:.*keyword
/dev/null
You may have
On Thursday 06 December 2001 17:32 pm, shock wrote:
> So far, it's been *fantastic*. Mail::SpamAssassin is unbelievably
> accurate, and the filter script behaves exactly as I expect it to.
I've been trying to install this module from CPAN with dh-make-perl. The
build fails claiming it can't fi
Klaus,
> > SPAM=SPAM
> > SPAMMERS=$HOME/procmail/spammers
> >
> > # Anti-spam
> > :0:
> > * ? (formail -x From: -x Sender: -x Reply-To: -x Received: -x
> > Subject: | fgrep - iqf $SPAMMERS) .
> > $SPAM /|\
> >
On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 11:21:57AM -0900, Christopher S. Swingley wrote:
| > I've been thinking of making a similar thing, just so I can list each
| > spammer on one line instead of 4.
|
| FYI, if you do something like this in your procmail recipe file:
|
| SPAM=SPAM
| SPAMMERS=$HOME/proc
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Christopher S. Swingley wrote:
> > I've been thinking of making a similar thing, just so I can list each
> > spammer on one line instead of 4.
>
> FYI, if you do something like this in your procmail recipe file:
>
> SPAM=SPAM
> SPAMMERS=$HOME/procmail/spammers
>
> #
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:40:18 -0500
dman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | I did this yesterday, but had to abandon it. I got quite a few errors
and
> | messages sent back to the originator of the emails. This is part of my
> | /var/log/exim/mainlog:
>
> I think this might be relevant -
> http://
> I've been thinking of making a similar thing, just so I can list each
> spammer on one line instead of 4.
FYI, if you do something like this in your procmail recipe file:
SPAM=SPAM
SPAMMERS=$HOME/procmail/spammers
# Anti-spam
:0:
* ? (formail -x From: -x Sender: -x Reply-To
On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 05:26:33PM +, Phillip Deackes wrote:
| On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:43:32 +0530
| Raghavendra Bhat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
| > Get yourselves the razor, dman. It is very good at catching and
| > reporting spam.
| >
| > apt-get install razor
|
| I did this yeste
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 07:16:48PM -0500, dman wrote:
> I saw a mention of a distributed spam-identification system in the
> weekly news, so I'll check that out too sometime.
It's razor. I just installed it, and it correctly recognised the two spam
messages I had lying around in my mailbox :)
Th
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:43:32 +0530
Raghavendra Bhat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Get yourselves the razor, dman. It is very good at catching and
> reporting spam.
>
> apt-get install razor
I did this yesterday, but had to abandon it. I got quite a few errors and
messages sent back to the
On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 12:20:29AM +, Pollywog wrote:
| On 2001.12.06 22:18 dman wrote:
| > On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 09:01:36PM +, Pollywog wrote:
|
| > | Maybe Procmail is in a different place than you set in your
| > | procmailrc.
| >
| > What do you mean by this? I also have a long lis
[Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 07:16:48PM -0500] dman :
> I saw a mention of a distributed spam-identification system in the
> weekly news, so I'll check that out too sometime.
Get yourselves the razor, dman. It is very good at catching and
reporting spam.
apt-get install razor
--
ragOO, V
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 01:17:30PM -0800, Craig Dickson wrote:
| dman wrote:
...
| > :0
| > * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| > /dev/null
| >
| > However the messages keep getting past these recipes and to my
| > list-matching recipe.
|
| Those look like they ought to work. One thing, though I doubt it's
| c
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 05:28:02PM -0700, Gary Hennigan wrote:
| dman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
...
| > I've been thinking of making a similar thing, just so I can list each
| > spammer on one line instead of 4.
|
| You do know that you can use a logical "OR" in your rules right? The
| "|" symbo
* dman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 05:32:48PM -0600, shock wrote:
>
> | i had the same problem with a different spammer. no matter what i did,
> | i simply could not get the procmail recipe to properly filter the
> | thing.
>
> at least I'm not a freak ;-)
nope,
dman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 05:32:48PM -0600, shock wrote:
> | On 2001.12.06 20:23 dman wrote:
> | >
> | > I've been getting a bunch of spam on a certain list. The latest
> | > message has the following From: line :
> |
> | i had the same problem with a different s
On 2001.12.06 22:18 dman wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 09:01:36PM +, Pollywog wrote:
| Maybe Procmail is in a different place than you set in your
| procmailrc.
What do you mean by this? I also have a long list of other spammer
addresses in that same file, and those others get filed pro
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 05:32:48PM -0600, shock wrote:
| On 2001.12.06 20:23 dman wrote:
| >
| > I've been getting a bunch of spam on a certain list. The latest
| > message has the following From: line :
|
| i had the same problem with a different spammer. no matter what i did,
| i simply could
On 2001.12.06 20:23 dman wrote:
>
> I've been getting a bunch of spam on a certain list. The latest
> message has the following From: line :
i had the same problem with a different spammer. no matter what i did,
i simply could not get the procmail recipe to properly filter the
thing. i finall
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 09:01:36PM +, Pollywog wrote:
| On 2001.12.06 20:23 dman wrote:
| >
| > I've been getting a bunch of spam on a certain list. The latest
| > message has the following From: line :
| >
| > From: "Lisa J." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| >
| > (some have a different name, but th
dman wrote:
> I've been getting a bunch of spam on a certain list. The latest
> message has the following From: line :
>
> From: "Lisa J." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> (some have a different name, but the same address) I want to
> automatically file these in the bit-bucket. Should be
> straightfo
On 2001.12.06 20:23 dman wrote:
I've been getting a bunch of spam on a certain list. The latest
message has the following From: line :
From: "Lisa J." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(some have a different name, but the same address) I want to
automatically file these in the bit-bucket. Should be
stra
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 09:50:13AM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote:
> >of such a recipe?
> I asked for it a few ago. The trick is to let GPG do it. Put
> set pgp_getkeys_command=""
> in your .muttrc and
> keyserver wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net
> in your .gnupg/options.
>
I have both of these options an
Hi will,
Quoth will trillich,
> i meant, procmail. it only FEELs like prickmail.
While this probably isn't exactly what you are asking for, I believe
maildrop and reformail will do what you want. Though I have never tried
it, there is an example in the maildrop man page that seems very similar
t
The "FFrom " and "rom " words are indications of file locking problems. If
you go to http://www.rosat.mpe-garching.mpg.de/mailing-lists/procmail/ and do
a search with a word ffrom you'll find that many others have had these
problemes too.
Here's a small excerpt:
"FFrom " is generally an indi
> :0 E
> * ^TO.*debian-user
> $MAIL/Lists/debian/user/incoming
>
> :0 E
> * ^FROM.*debian-user
> $MAIL/Lists/debian/user/incoming
You can OR them like so:
* ^(TO|From.*)debian-user
On Sun, 2 Mar 1997, Elie Rosenblum wrote:
> * ^From .*debian-user*
> * ^To: .*debian-user*
> * ^Cc: .*debian-user*
even more tidy:
* ^(From|To|Cc):.*debian
-!-
On Sun, 2 Mar 1997, Elie Rosenblum wrote:
> Or you could just use the built in macros ^TO and ^FROM:
>
> :0
> * ^TO.*debian-user
> * ^FROM.*debian-user
> debian-user-l-inbox
>
> Since ^TO will match all the addressing mechanisms procmail can check,
> To:, Apparently-To:, Cc:, and any others it
On Sun, 2 Mar 1997, Patrick Ryan wrote:
> :0
> * ^From .*debian-user*
> debian-user-l-inbox
>
> :0
> * ^To: .*debian-user*
> debian-user-l-inbox
>
> :0
> * ^Cc: .*debian-user*
> debian-user-l-inbox
This should be the same as:
:0
* ^From .*debian-user*
* ^To: .*debian-user*
* ^Cc: .*debian-user*
Howdy,
I posted my old procmail recipe for debian-user, but I found holes
in it after I posted. My new configuration hasn't given me any trouble.
Here it is:
-Begin-
PATH=$HOME/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/ucb:/bin:/usr/local/bin:.
MAILDIR=$HOME/mail
DEFAULT=/usr/spool/mail/pryan
LOGFILE=$H
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Normally I have something like this in my .procmailrc file:
[ ... ]
MAILDIR=$HOME/mail/debian
LOGFILE=$HOME/mail/log/debian.log
:0:
* ^Resent-Sender.*debian-announce-request@
debian-announce
:0:
* ^Resent-Sender.*debian-user-request@
debian-user
[ ... ]
But a
Heikki Vatiainen typed:
[Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> There's already been a couple of examples here on the list but I thought I'll
> mail my version too. Here it goes:
[...]
> Here's the version that should work for you:
> :0:
> * ^X-Mailing-List: .*debian-user.*
> $H
There's already been a couple of examples here on the list but I thought I'll
mail my version too. Here it goes:
:0 : $MAILDIR/debian-user.lock
* ^X-Mailing-List: .*debian-user.*
| $RCVSTORE +$HOME/Mail/IN.debian
I use mh and exmh to read my mail so that's why the first and third line look
like
When this is done please post it here or forward it to me. Procamil and I
have this love hate thing going on.
On Mon, 24 Feb 1997, Brian Skreeg wrote:
> Hi folks, Could someone do me a wee favour and write out a simple
>procmail recipe for filtering this mailing list to another folder?
>
On Mon, 24 Feb 1997, Brian Skreeg wrote:
> Hi folks, Could someone do me a wee favour and write out a simple
> procmail recipe for filtering this mailing list to another folder?
> (~Mail/deb)
:0:
* ^Resent-From.*debian-user
$HOME/Mail/deb
Jason Costomiris | Finger for PGP
On Mon, 24 Feb 1997, Brian Skreeg wrote:
> Hi folks, Could someone do me a wee favour and write out a simple
> procmail recipe for filtering this mailing list to another folder?
> (~Mail/deb)
>
> Been playing around for ages and can't seem to get it to filter on the
> To: header.
>
Brian,
Here's what I use:
~/.procmailrc:
-begin-
# Please check if all the paths in PATH are reachable, remove the ones that
# are not.
PATH=$HOME/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/ucb:/bin:/usr/local/bin:.
MAILDIR=$HOME/mail
DEFAULT=/usr/spool/mail/pryan
LOGFILE=$HOME/.procmail/from.log
LOC
57 matches
Mail list logo
