On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 03:22:33AM +0200, Carel Fellinger wrote: > On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 12:12:28AM -0500, Michael D Schleif wrote: > > ...Of course, I need something to act as MTA; but, what I am > > unclear about is that which exim contributes as LDA that cannot -- > > readily -- be accomplished via procmail. What are reasons to continue > > to use exim -- or equivalent -- between fetchmail and procmail? > > It's a necessity in a multi-drop setup, i.e. getting mail for different > people in the same mailbox at your IPS, you need a MTA to deliver to > all the different users. > > I for instance have one mailbox at my IPS with 5 aliases. Being Dutch > and all, we use those aliases so all members of the family seem to > have there own email address, and I configured fetchmail to get the > mail and deliver depending on header info. It used to work flawless, > but then the Envelop/Deliverd-TO header got mangled at my IPS and hence > meaningless:(, and now I've to rely on (incomplete) Received headers. Can't you use procmail to filter on headers. That's the point of procmail :) > A second reason I prefer the setup I have, is that I can switch to > maildrop, gnus elisp filters or cyrus's sieve (imap site filtering) > without having to change a thing in my fetchmail setup. If I were to > use procmail directly, I would have to both change my general mail > setup *and* my fetchmail/procmail setup. Ahh well, that's ok. But the reason I like procmail is that I can use gnus, mutt, etc. All at the same time and have the filtering happen somewhere else, so I don't have to worry about looking at my mail in one program and having the filters in the other mess up. Bijan
Attachment:
pgp6YhTBVfqeZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature