At 6:19 AM EDT on April 19 Sven Guckes sent off: > * Dan Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-17 17:18]: > > Previously, s. keeling wrote: [whatever] > > You seem to have sent this to something other than "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > because my list-reply did not work. I had to enter the address manually. > > Don't tell me the list has more than one address... > > do I need to have multiple subscribe lines for it? Ugh. > > there exist several local aliases for the mutt mailing lists - > on gbnet.org, sonytel.be, and yahoogroups.com. > > so here are some of the addresses: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I have appended my procmail rules > which sort them into IN.MUTT mostly - enjoy! > > Sven [who'd set up the lists to deny distribution > via arbitrary addresses from other domains]
Do you really get a lot of mail with "mutt-" in it that *isn't* for one of the mutt lists? I see a lot of gbnet grumbling but I've never had a problem because I use a minimum match philosophy: # Sort away mails from the mutt (mail user agent) mailing list :0 * ^Return-Path: <mutt-users-owner { :0: * ? $FORMAIL -x Subject: | grep -isF -f ~/.mutt/killfiles/muttin dumpedthreads :0: muttin } Granted, this doesn't catch the other mutt lists (because I don't need to), and IN.mutt would be a better name than muttin. Return-Path works (for now anyway) and is "cheaper" than ^TO. > === http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/setup/procmailrc > # 981009 - catch messages from gateway address on gbnet.net: > :0 > * ^TOmutt(-dev|-users)?@(ns.)?gbnet.net > IN.MUTT Just to clarify - are you using MH or maildirs, Sven? mbox users should use :0: (And I only mean to warn mbox users, not start a mbox/maildir jihad.) -- "If Microsoft can change and compete on quality, I've won." -- L. Torvalds Robert I. Reid | PGP/GPG Keys: http://astro.utoronto.ca/~reid/pgp.html
msg27431/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature