Re: LYNX-DEV lynx-dev list status/problems

[uid no body]

On Mon, 14 Jul 1997, Nelson Henry Eric wrote:

> > and procmail should be easier to create a recipe for.  Suspect messages
> > can then go to a bouncer.
> 
> I would not recommend bouncing to anyone right off the bat.

I meant something more intelligent - something with "EMAIL Blaster 2.5" or
"Cyber-Bomber" probably should go to /dev/null, other things should be
verified.  Since they convieniently advertise the bomber products
somewhere in the message, they are easy to spot :).

> > For my processing, I actually run procmail twice, first to filter out
> > known spamsites (among other things) into an incoming folder, then I
> 
> Just to clarify, it is not necessary to actually "run procmail twice".
> In the file .procmailrc one can put any number of INCLUDERC= directives

I do that too, I run things twice for a different reason - I like to
checkpoint my incoming mail into a single folder, and then break it out
when I am ready to read it (with appropriate backups using compression). 
Another reason is that I scan the incoming folder for unknown PGP keys and
look them up on a keyserver, and one invocation of PGP will find all
missing keys in incoming instead of a per-message invocation.

--- reply to tzeruch - at - ceddec - dot - com ---

;
; To UNSUBSCRIBE:  Send a mail message to address@hidden
;                  with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
;                  quotation marks) on a line by itself.
;