Re: Recent spam increase
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@ieee.org>:
> On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 05:41:36 GMT, s keeling <keeling@spots.ab.ca> said:
>
> > I agree procmail can do it (I do it with procmail). I question the
> > "Very easy" bit. procmail is not easy to control. If you've the
> > time to learn its quirks, it's great. However, it's somewhat like a
> > C programmer trying to wrap his head around C++ (OOP/OOD). It takes
> > a lot of "I WANT to do this!" to get it. Months of it. Perhaps
> > years.
> >
> > Easier might be mailfilter. I've never used it, but it's purported
> > to be the English language equivalent to procmail's "modem line
> > noise" syntax, and as powerful.
>
> I've always found procmail to be underpowered and have an
You're the first person I've seen to describe procmail as
"underpowered." I would not list that as one of its attributes.
Perhaps it's difficult to figure out how to get it to do $THAT, but
(in my experience) it can do $THAT.
However, I'm past the curve. *I* have no trouble getting procmail to
do what I want it to do. Whether the price is worth the effort for
others is another question. If I was starting over, I'd probably go
with the alternatives.
> unreasonable learning curve. I prefer using mailagent, which can do
> far more than procmail, but seems to be easier to set up.
Another alternative, thanks.
--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*) http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling Linux Counter #80292
- - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html Please, don't Cc: me.
Spammers! http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling/emails.html
Reply to: