On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 02:55:59PM +0100, Paul J Collins wrote:
>> DA> :0:
> The second colon causes processing of the remainder of the rules to continue.
The function of the second colon actually tells procmail to use a lock
file, not that it should continue with the remainder of the rules. To
continue with the remainder of the rules, you would use :0 c: which tells
procmail to make a copy of the mail and use a lock file. Without the c,
procmail will finish because it will consider the mail successfully
delivered.
If removing the colon does not solve the problem (I suspect it won't),
then I would check to see if procmail is infact set up as the local mail
delivery agent. If it is not, then creating $HOME/.forward with the
following line as its contents will get it working:
|IFS=' ' && exec /usr/local/bin/procmail -f- || exit 75 #yourusername
The recipe itself is fine. You can remove the colon though because there
is no need to use a lock file if you are just dumping the mail into
/dev/null. If you were usingg a different file then yes, you would use the
colon to lock it because otherwise if two mails arrived together they
would both simulatenously write to the same file.
Regards,
Garth
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
