Re: undigesting and filtering by list-id
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 10:23:02 -0800
Ken Irving <fnkci@uaf.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:27:13PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:15:16 -0700
> > John L Fjellstad <john-debian@fjellstad.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> 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" ...
That's what I half realized in another message in this thread where I
wrote:
> I'm not
> sure how to do the latter without some sort of variable assignment, but
> 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.
I know what you mean.
> 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
Thanks for the suggestion,
Celejar
--
mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email
ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator
Reply to: