headers
David W. Tamkin | 1 Aug 2005 01:19
Picon
Favicon

Re: Using Formail to remove headers

Dallman suggested to Stephen,

> One way: Save the headers you want into vars, remove all headers,
> put the headers you want back.

>   :0
>   * ^\/From:.*
>   { H_FROM = $MATCH }
> 
> 
>   :0
>   * ^\/Subject:.*
>   { H_SUBJ = $MATCH }
> 
> 
>   :0
>   * ^\/Content-Type:.*
>   { H_CTYPE = $MATCH }
> 
>   :0
>   * ^\/MIME-Version:.*
>   { H_MIME = $MATCH }
> 
> 
>   :0
>   * ^\/Content-Transfer-Encoding:.*
>   { H_CTE = $MATCH }
> 
> 
>   :0
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 16 comments |
headers
Ligesh | 1 Aug 2005 01:58
Picon

Re: problem with spamassassin and following rules (Was: Re: OT)

On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 11:36:03PM +0200, Dallman Ross wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 02:11:14AM +0530, Ligesh wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 08:44:53PM +0200, Dallman Ross wrote:
> 
> >
> >  But seeing the behaviour with strace, I think if I run it
> >  through gdb, the bug may not show up. This is one of the most
> >  frustrating kind of bugs; ones that disappear in the presence
> >  of a debugger. It is most likely a timing issue. The wait()
> >  function may not be working properly, and the checks are
> >  happening before spamassassin properly returns or something. I
> >  do not know the architecture of procmail so I cannot comment
> >  more.
> 
> Think about what you're saying: you're saying procmail doesn't
> work with spamassassin.  Well, tens of thousands of uses run
> spamassassin from procmail hundreds or thousands of times a day.
> Where are these thousands of frustrated users, then, with their
> bug reports?  SA has been around for four years now.  I've been
> on this list for eleven, myself.  I'm not the oldest user
> around here, by any means, either.
> 

 I am not saying that procmail doesn't work with spamassassin, but rather there is a very specific bug which
gets triggered on very particular circumstances. I am not the only one. There were 2 other people who
complained, but neither of them has later attributed it to config mistakes. And one guy specifically said
the config works on another machine, but on one machine somehow this weird behaviour is displayed.

 Anyway, here's what's happening in the code. The "themail.p" variable becomes just an "F" once spamasssin
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ligesh | 1 Aug 2005 02:03
Picon

Re: problem with ... following rules

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 03:12:00AM +0530, Ligesh wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 01:22:09PM -0700, Professional Software Engineering wrote:
> > At 19:05 2005-07-31 +0530, Ligesh wrote:
> > One logical rule I have is to use sensible subject lines.  Another is to 
> > not use replies to other messages (including list-s*bscription welcome 
> > messages) to springboard a new message to the list because I'm too lazy to 
> > type the list address and a proper subject on my posts.  Besides having 
> > subject lines which are nonsensical to the content of the message, the 
> > "References:" and "In-Reply-To:" headers are inserted by modern mailers to 
> > manage threads, and you end up having a thread relationship with an 
> > unaffiliated topic.
> 

  I am sorry, you are blabbering about something you have no clue about. What does 'In-Reply-To' has to do with
munging 'Reply-To'? At least, I run a full mailing list which keeps the thread structure intact, but
replaces any Reply-To with the mailing list. Mailman has a proper configuration option itself which
allows you to replace any Reply-Tos with that of the mailing list. And your own signature at the end says
that a copy shouldn't be sent to you. Exactly!!! If you configure mailman in the way I do, pressing reply
will send a mail only to the list, and never to the sender. See.  You have no idea of what the heck you are
talking about.

> > But I'm sure YOUR "logic" makes sense to you.  Somehow.
> > 
> > >  Of course, badly written softwares will screw up; but that can't be helped.
> > 
> > Uhm, don't use badly written software? 
> 
>  Of course, you shouldn't use badly written software. Is that a rhetorical question?
> 
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 10 comments |
headers
Ligesh | 1 Aug 2005 02:03
Picon

Re: OT

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 03:20:24AM +0530, Ligesh wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 01:08:09PM -0700, Professional Software Engineering wrote:
> > At 00:18 2005-08-01 +0530, Ligesh wrote:
> > 
> > >  You need to change your stupid mail archiving software that does  not 
> > > wrap lines properly. Your statement can be rephrased as: If you come to 
> > > an  insane asylum, you better start acting mad.
> > 
> > See my prior response to you.
> > 
> > What you're saying is that the standards by which everyone else manages to 
> > communicate don't apply to you, and that everyone else should do as YOU want.
> 
 Every standard should have a reason. I am ready to defend my actions, and logically too.  People have a habit
of just following something because everyone else does it. So should I just blindly follow some idiotic
procedure just because the whole world is doing so?  And as I have said above, the 75 char lines screws up in a
lot of places, especially in forums, where it ruins the whole appearance.  I used to use vm (The mailer in
Emacs), and I used to post messages to forums using the emacs itslef, and I really hate the way it is
displayed there.  And anyway, I am not the only one. Quite a lot of people - especially ones using Outlook -
use a single line paragraph, and again, my posts used to look ugly when juxtapositioned with their replys.
All in all, I find quite a lot of advantages to single line paragraphs, and quite a few disadvantages to the
75 char style. That is all.

 
--
:: Ligesh :: http://ligesh.com
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Ligesh | 1 Aug 2005 02:19
Picon

Re: problem with spamassassin and following rules (Was: Re: OT)

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 02:15:43AM +0530, Ligesh wrote:
> 
>  Btw, I am sorry, I never mentioned my spamassassin version - I am using redhat 8, with spamassasin version
2.31-16. I am testing by piping mails from mutt to procmail, and I have tried quite a lot of permutations - as
I had said in my earlier mail, including running it through 'strace -f procmail'.
>  

 Ok here's what I think is happening. Procmail is using the output of the spamassasin rule for further
comparisons, but it is delivering the original mail itself. So the variable that is used to make regexp
search is getting corrupted, the the procmail doesn't let the mail get corrupted. So the mail gets
delivered to the wrong mailbox.

 That's it. Thanks for the help.

--
:: Ligesh :: http://ligesh.com
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Dallman Ross | 1 Aug 2005 02:15

Re: problem with ... following rules

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 05:33:07AM +0530, Ligesh wrote:

> A display software has to take care of the limitations at its
> end. It shouldn't really make assumptions about the sender. If
> it is a single line paragraph, you just wrap it as you wish. And
> Wrapping is a trivial task. I think it is default in html to
> wrap and the idiotic mail archiver is forcibly adding a nowrap
> or something. That is pathetic design. And now because of bad
> software design you want everyone to follow some outdated
> convention?

My mutt wraps your lines.  But I don't want to look all the way over
to the 124th column (where I currently have my terminal emulation
program set for cols) to see the end of the line -- and that, with
no right whitespace.  That is very tiring.  I want to be able
to read the text edge-to-edge without moving my head all around.

>   I don't understand why you need multiple attribution marker per
>   paragraph. The purpose of attribution marker is to make it easy
>   to distinguish your statements from others, and all normal MUAs
>   do this by showing them in different colors. So whether you

Ex*cuse* me?  *Color*?  and that's *normal*?

I am not seeing any color here.  Nor do I want to.

I also use Outlook, and I don't see any color there, either.
Nor do I see any MIME/HTML stuff, as I have a COM plug-in 
to turn it off.  I want plain text.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Dallman Ross | 1 Aug 2005 02:17

Re: problem with spamassassin and following rules (Was: Re: OT)

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 05:49:56AM +0530, Ligesh wrote:
> Ok here's what I think is happening. Procmail is using the
> output of the spamassasin rule for further comparisons, but it
> is delivering the original mail itself. So the variable that is
> used to make regexp search is getting corrupted, the the procmail
> doesn't let the mail get corrupted. So the mail gets delivered to
> the wrong mailbox.

I don't know about that.  Procmail delivers what you filtered the
message to with the fw flags.

I do remember a SA stupid peculiarity from a couple of years ago
where it would change the spaces in headers, though.  Could that
be it?  I.e., it would either do tab expansion or add extra
spaces after the header colons or something.

Dallman
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ruud H.G. van Tol | 1 Aug 2005 03:22
Picon

Re: Using Formail to remove headers

Stephen Allen schreef:
> procmail <at> rowyerboat.com:
>
>> Currently, I remove all Received: headers as a courtesy to others,
>> but I ws thinking I don't actually need any header except To:, From:,
>> Subject: and anything to do with MIME.
>
> Oops, I would need to keep the Message-ID: header too.

Don't forget the References: and In-Reply-To: header fields.

--

-- 
Grtz, Ruud
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Michelle Konzack | 1 Aug 2005 03:48
Picon
Favicon

Re: handle spam in local inbox

Am 2005-07-31 16:24:19, schrieb Jonathan Gonzalez:
> Thanks for you post Stephen.
> 
> I understand thant in order to fit 100% my case i will need to put a 
> .procmailrc file in the home of the user and then adpat your code to 
> show something like this, because i have maildir folders:
> 
> <snip from /var/vmail/domain/user>
>     :0
>     * ^Subject:.*\[SPAM\?\]
>     Maildir/.SPAM/new
> </snip>
> 
> Is it correct?

No, because you use maildir.
Right:

    :0
    * ^Subject:.*\[SPAM\?\]
    Maildir/.SPAM/

> TIA,
> 
> jonathan

Greetings
Michelle

--

--
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Stephen Allen | 1 Aug 2005 04:20

Re: Using Formail to remove headers

On Monday, August 01, 2005 12:19 AM
<dattier <at> panix.com> wrote:

>  :0
>  | formail -kz -X From: -X Subject: -X Content-Type: \
>    -X MIME-Version: -X Content-Transfer-Encoding: \
>    -X Content-Disposition: | \
>    "$SENDMAIL" $SENDMAILFLAGS -t someone <at> somewhere.else

I adapted your idea and laid it out as below I've done it like this so it's 
easier for me to change).  It seems to work except that I can't get the 
From: and To: fields added.  The message is delievered correctly, so the 
SENDMAIL part is working, but the From: & To: are being set to my user 
default rather than what I want as shown.

Thank you,
Steve :)

:0
* ^X-Original-To:.test-support <at> rowyerboat\.com
    | formail -kz \
 -X Subject: \
 -X In-Reply-To: \
 -X Content-Type: \
 -X MIME-Version: \
 -X Content-Transfer-Encoding: \
 -X Content-Disposition: \
 -X Message-ID: \
 -X References: \
 -A "From: Stephen Allen <mytest <at> rowyerboat.com>" \
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |

Gmane