Re: procmail recipe question
From: Ed Murphy (emurphy42_at_socal.rr.com)
Date: 01/28/04
- Next message: Mike Cox: "Re: C++ on Unix - serious coding help needed. We're in the Silicon valley location"
- Previous message: nobody_at_nowhere.com: "Re: NTFS kernel modules for 2.4.x"
- In reply to: Richard Kimber: "procmail recipe question"
- Next in thread: Richard Kimber: "Re: procmail recipe question"
- Reply: Richard Kimber: "Re: procmail recipe question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:22:31 GMT
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:03:06 +0000, Richard Kimber wrote:
> How do I formulate a procmail test for a non-existent
> Subject:
:0
* ^Subject: *$
> and/or an empty email body? in an email
:0 B
* ![^ ]
or
:0 B
* ![A-Za-z]
I think these will work, but I haven't tested them. In particular, I
don't know whether the body tests will hold up against attachments; the
following set should match any message with a non-text attachment:
:0 B
* ^Content-Type: [^t]
:0 B
* ^Content-Type: t[^e]
:0 B
* ^Content-Type: te[^x]
:0 B
* ^Content-Type: tex[^t]
International users may want to consider the A-Za-z part in more
detail. It may not be a substantive issue, though.
- Next message: Mike Cox: "Re: C++ on Unix - serious coding help needed. We're in the Silicon valley location"
- Previous message: nobody_at_nowhere.com: "Re: NTFS kernel modules for 2.4.x"
- In reply to: Richard Kimber: "procmail recipe question"
- Next in thread: Richard Kimber: "Re: procmail recipe question"
- Reply: Richard Kimber: "Re: procmail recipe question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
