similar to: pigeonhole sieve "standalone"

hi. i'm building a package using autotools. to propagate the package version number from configure.ac to DESCRIPTION, i'm using a DESCRIPTION.in file. both of these files are "shar"'d below. i need to distribute the DESCRIPTION.in file, as ./configure will need it. but, "R CMD check" wants to look at DESCRIPTION, so i've let that also come into the package

I'm struggling to achieve the kind of filtering with sieve that I was able to do with procmail. TL;DR I'd like a way to loop through a set of (address, destination) pairs in sieve so that I can maintain the (address, destination) pairs in one place and not have to explicitly write scores of nearly identical [...] if address :matches ["From", "Sender",

--------------------------------------------------------------------- Red Hat, Inc. Security Advisory Synopsis: New nmh packages available Advisory ID: RHSA-2000:006-01 Issue date: 2000-03-06 Updated on: 2000-03-06 Product: Red Hat Linux Keywords: nmh mime mhshow Cross references: N/A

------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <14008.870179829.1@erehwon.bmc.com> See attached. Red Hat Linux package mh-6.8.3-13.i386.rpm installs the inc and msgchk programs as follows: -rwsr-sr-x- root mail 72628 Oct 17 16:57 /usr/bin/mh/inc -rwsr-xr-x- root root 52536 Oct 17 16:57 /usr/bin/mh/msgchk Hal -------

Chuck and Greg, Thanks a lot for your help! I have a much better understanding now of what is happening ?under the hood?. Kind Regards, Jason > On 31 May 2018, at 20:08, Greg Minshall <minshall at acm.org> wrote: > > Jason, > > as Chuck Berry (to whom, *thanks* for 'do {...} while(0)'!) suggested, > using grep, or even grep executed from find, such as >

I'm working at the next part of the virtual domains mail server. I'm moving this account (raanders at acm.org is a forwarder) which has a bunch of procmail rules to file into folders. My question is if it is more efficient is use? if { ... } elsif { ... } elsif { ... } else This seems to be the way many of the example scripts do it but I found at least one that used if

Running with Samba 3.5.4, the Samba3x packages from CentOS 5.6 with added gpfs and tsmsm VFS modules against a GPFS 3.4.0.6 file system. Unix extensions are turned off because otherwise OS X 10.5 messes with group ownership and permissions and shares for "groups" don't work as required. Unfortunately being at a University I don't get to control the environment tightly, unless

Has anyone seen the below error before? It appears to only occur when Puppet runs automatically (i.e. a "puppetd --test" doesn''t cause it). I have recently installed new Ruby rpms on the server and I''m guessing that I may have left out something when I built the RPMS (based on FC7 SRPM). > -----Original Message----- > From: report@melrhweb1.nmh-au

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Index: linux-2.6/fs/ocfs2/cluster/tcp.c =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/ocfs2/cluster/tcp.c 2007-05-06 13:51:17.000000000 +0200 +++ linux-2.6/fs/ocfs2/cluster/tcp.c 2007-05-17 15:00:14.000000000 +0200 @@ -261,14 +261,12 @@ out: static void o2net_complete_nodes_nsw(struct o2net_node

I'm attempting to fetch a kernel over http using lpxelinux.0, as documented in http://www.syslinux.org/wiki/index.php/Syslinux_5_Changelog and it took me far too long to succeed... My first attempt was via pxelinux.0 as embedded in the Ubuntu 13.04 installer, this gave me the error that gPXE/iPXE extentions weren't available. So I inferred that this wasn't v5.10 or greater. Then I

Hello, still trying to move from procmail to sieve, but there are new problems. Currently we use procmail for autoresponder and let user choose timerange, in which responder should work. May be you set up today your responder for 2 weeks in future where responder start and stop automatically without further manuell intervention. In procmail this is done by simple scripting and comparison of

Greg, I see what you mean, but on the other hand, that's not how we think about real numbers working either, and doubles have that behavior generally. It might be possible to put checks in (with a potentially non-trivial overhead cost) to disallow that kind of thing, but again R (and everyone else, I think?) doesn't do so for regular doubles. Also, I would expect the year 1e50 and the

Hello, I currently have one machine running postfix SMTP server as MTA along with dovecot IMAP server for email. Although it only supports a handful of users, email service is important to us all; so I'm looking to make this a more fault-tolerant / highly-available system. To that end, I'm planning on configuring postfix to use deliver/dovecot-lda as my MDA (using procmail at the

Op 10/28/2015 om 3:56 PM schreef Hajo Locke: > Hello, > > still trying to move from procmail to sieve, but there are new problems. > > Currently we use procmail for autoresponder and let user choose > timerange, in which responder should work. May be you set up today > your responder for 2 weeks in future where responder start and stop > automatically without further

Hi, As I migrate to sieve, I would like to carry over the logic I had in procmail rules, which let me take all mail where I'd never sent email to that address into a final spam catchall, which I called "neversent." I see that sieve can't run external programs, and I wonder if that means I'm SOL, or is there an alternate approach that does roughly the same thing? (I

hi. this is sort of a software methodology question. i'm working on developing a package (with C source code). developing it, i use autotools, git, make, and such like. as a result, there are random files in my source code directory that "R CMD check" would rather not see. some of these files (such as .git and friends) i could arrange to move to "just above" my

Currently I use procmail to filter mails according to specific tokens and trigger certain actions. For that I feed mails which match certain criteria to a pipe which then post processes the mail right when it arrives. >From what I found I could use a workaround with sieve by storing mails somewhere and then work on those at certain intervals. But this is an awkward solution which causes delays

Hello, i'm trying to do some delivery notification for each incoming address. Problem is that sieve vacation has :days but minimum value is 1 eg period in which addresses are kept and are not responded to - but that is not that i want. Is there other extension (in devel ???) or some other way (lda using procmail or maildrop) how to implement my request ? (Before migration we used qmail +

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 24 Jul 2014, Franck CALLEJA wrote: > Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:50:21 +0200 > From: Franck CALLEJA <fc193 at hotmail.com> > Reply-To: Dovecot Mailing List <dovecot at dovecot.org> > To: "dovecot at dovecot.org" <dovecot at dovecot.org> > Subject: Sieve plugin (fc17 + sendmail + roundcube) > >

Hi, sometimes mails that i discard via sieve gets delivered to my inbox and i can not figure out why. So i hope you can give me a hint. My setup is: I use a self compiled dovecot 1.2.4 with installed sieve and managesieve plugin. Incoming mails a processed by Postfix and the delivered to Procmail. Procmail invokes Spamassassin and discard all mails marked as spam. The other mails are passed to