- WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

RE: [Wlug] Procmail Question

by Marc Hughes

With the locking (:0:) all seems to work now. I'm guessing it's because I have an IMAP connection open to the mailbox while I receive the new email and it get's processed. While we're talking about procmail... A second question: :0: * ^From.*jenny(a)axte84\.com * ^Subject.*MILLION OPT-IN EMAIL ADDRESSES Badspam This will do an AND between the two conditions ... Is there an easy way to OR between them? ... Or do I need to make a separate rule for each and every condition? And an even further note... What are the thoughts on some of these anti-spam tools that work with procmail? Any favorites? Thanks a lot guys, -Marc -----Original Message----- From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:felicity@kluge.net] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:21 AM To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org Subject: Re: [Wlug] Procmail Question On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 09:13:18AM -0500, Peter Gutowski wrote: > According to the man page the second ":" is optional, i.e. > > :0: > > but, as a sample of something known to work (from the SpamAssassin > sample .procmailrc) it does use the above syntax. Here's the example: > > So maybe the second ":" is not optional all the time? Just so we're all clear, the second ":" tells procmail that is needs to lock the file before writing to avoid corrupted mailboxes. So it's a good idea if you're writing to a mailbox, but isn't actually required, especially if you're writing to /dev/null or something. I didn't see anything wrong offhand with the procmail rules shown. Can we see the header of an example mail which doesn't work with the original but works with the carbon copy method? (and by work, just to double check, we're talking about the message going into the "test" folder). -- Randomly Generated Tagline: "When it is not necessary to make a decision, it is necessary not to make a decision." - From www.slashdot.org

Nov. 8, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Procmail Question

by Theo Van Dinter

On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 09:13:18AM -0500, Peter Gutowski wrote: > According to the man page the second ":" is optional, i.e. > > :0: > > but, as a sample of something known to work (from the SpamAssassin sample .procmailrc) it does use the above syntax. Here's the example: > > So maybe the second ":" is not optional all the time? Just so we're all clear, the second ":" tells procmail that is needs to lock the file before writing to avoid corrupted mailboxes. So it's a good idea if you're writing to a mailbox, but isn't actually required, especially if you're writing to /dev/null or something. I didn't see anything wrong offhand with the procmail rules shown. Can we see the header of an example mail which doesn't work with the original but works with the carbon copy method? (and by work, just to double check, we're talking about the message going into the "test" folder). -- Randomly Generated Tagline: "When it is not necessary to make a decision, it is necessary not to make a decision." - From www.slashdot.org

Nov. 8, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Procmail Question

by jkinz＠rcn.com

On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 08:45:58AM -0500, Marc Hughes wrote: > I have a procmail question.... I have this rule: > I dpn't know if this is the problem , but you're missing the ending colon on the first line of this provcmail rule. :-) > :0 > * ^From:.*hughesm@tomsnyder.com > test Instead of : > :0 Try: > :0 : -- Jeff Kinz, Emergent Research, Hudson, MA. "jkinz(a)ultranet.com" "jkinz(a)rcn.com" copyright 2002. Use is restricted. Any use is an acceptance of the offer at http://users.rcn.com/jkinz/policy.html. (o- -o) //\ eLviintuaxbilse /\\ V_/_ _\_V

Nov. 8, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Procmail Question

by Peter Gutowski

According to the man page the second ":" is optional, i.e. :0: but, as a sample of something known to work (from the SpamAssassin sample .procmailrc) it does use the above syntax. Here's the example: # Mails with a score of 15 or higher are almost certainly spam (with 0.05% # false positives according to rules/STATISTICS.txt). Let's put them in a # different mbox. (This one is optional.) :0: * ^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* mail/almost-certainly-spam The above *does* work on my system (RHL8.0). So maybe the second ":" is not optional all the time? HTH, Peter On Friday, November 8, 2002 8:45 AM, Marc Hughes <HughesM(a)tomsnyder.com> wrote: >I have a procmail question.... I have this rule: > >:0 >* ^From:.*hughesm@tomsnyder.com >test > >That doesn't seem to work. But this rule... > >:0c >* ^From:.*hughesm@tomsnyder.com >test > >... Works just fine ... But I want the first rule, I don't want it to >copy (what the :0c does) I want it to move (:0) Am I doing something >wrong? > >Thanks! >-Marc > >_______________________________________________ >Wlug mailing list >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > -- Peter Gutowski <peter(a)linuxchamps.com> // tel.: (413) 531-0123 "When in company, put not your hands to any part of the body not usually discovered." --George Washington, _Rules for Civility and Decent Behavior_

Nov. 8, 2002

Procmail Question

by Marc Hughes

I have a procmail question.... I have this rule: :0 * ^From:.*hughesm@tomsnyder.com test That doesn't seem to work. But this rule... :0c * ^From:.*hughesm@tomsnyder.com test ... Works just fine ... But I want the first rule, I don't want it to copy (what the :0c does) I want it to move (:0) Am I doing something wrong? Thanks! -Marc

Nov. 8, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Kevin Mitnick speaking at Marlboro Softpro tonight...

by Gary Hanley

On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Clint Moyer wrote: > I'm more interested in the November 20th speaker who's the > author of the best Unix book ever. (Now in it's 3rd > edition.) I haven't seen the new edition but I have the 2nd, and while it's a certainly good book I think that the purple book is more comprehensive. Hell, it has four authors! -- Gary

Nov. 8, 2002

RE: [Wlug] x86 emulation/vmare clone

by Steve Freitag

> From: Keith Wright > > Depending on what you're trying to do, you might also want > > to check out Cygwin: http://www.cygwin.com/ > > > > "Cygwin is a UNIX environment, developed by Red Hat, for Windows." > > Well that's in quotes, so it's just a character string, > but lest somebody mistake it for an assertion... [ rant/history lesson deleted for those with slow modems :-) ] For the curious, the quotes were indicating a direct quote from (the top of) http://www.cygwin.com Perhaps not the best choice of wording... considering all the individuals (besides Red Hat/Cygnus) who have helped make cygwin possible. For even earlier history of GNU software on DOS check here: http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/history.html http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/doc/eli-m17n99.html

Nov. 8, 2002

Re: [Wlug] gnome desktop menus?

by Frank Sweetser

On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 06:47:48PM -0500, Baris Hasdemir wrote: > hi again, > > This is strange because gmenu is one of the core programs of gnome. Of gnome v1, yes - not of gnome v2. I actually haven't yet found a way to get equivalent functionality out of gnome v2... -- Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu, fs at suave.net | $ x 18 Full-time WPI Network Engineer, Part time Linux/Perl guy | There are no threads in a.b.p.erotica, so there's no gain in using a threaded news reader. (Unknown source)

Nov. 8, 2002

Re: [Wlug] gnome desktop menus?

by Baris Hasdemir

hi again, This is strange because gmenu is one of the core programs of gnome. But you can do this way too. those entries on the panel are some .desktop files and here is what Internet/Galeon.desktop entry has in it: penguen@penguen:~$ cat /usr/share/gnome/apps/Internet/galeon.desktop [Desktop Entry] Name=Galeon Comment=Galeon Web Browser Exec=galeon Terminal=0 Type=Application Icon=galeon.png penguen@penguen:~$ Name and Exec entries are enough, though. simply creating a .desktop file in the directory (in my case /usr/share/gnome/apps) will put a new entry on the panel menu. best wishes, baris On Thu, 7 Nov 2002 17:40:21 -0500 (EST) Bill Mills-Curran wrote: > Baris, > > I can't find any gmenu command or file in the Red Hat distro. > > Thanks, > Bill >

Nov. 7, 2002

Re: [Wlug] gnome desktop menus?

by Bill Mills-Curran

Baris, I can't find any gmenu command or file in the Red Hat distro. Thanks, Bill On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Baris Hasdemir wrote: > Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 16:20:41 -0500 > From: Baris Hasdemir <penguen(a)hasdemir.com> > Reply-To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > Subject: Re: [Wlug] gnome desktop menus? > > hi, > > did you try > $ gmenu > and > # gmenu > > best wishes, > baris > > On Wed, 6 Nov 2002 16:04:38 -0500 (EST) > Bill Mills-Curran wrote: > > > I've installed RedHat 8.0 on my system, and I've decided to finally > > wean myself from fvwm2 and use the default setup. I've been poking > > around trying to figure out how to add entries to the panel menus. > > There doesn't seem to be a gui interface to do it. (There is a gui to > > add stuff to the desktop and to the panel, but not the menus.) I > > suspect that the secret handshake is contained in /etc/gnome-vfs-2.0/ > > directories, but I haven't found the secret decoder ring to help > > figure out the right way to do this. > > > > My main motivation is to add some favorite applications to the menus > > for my family. They are not about to use the command line. > > > > Does anyone have any suggestions? > > > > TIA, > > Bill > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wlug mailing list > > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug >

Nov. 7, 2002