Re: gbnet address still used for mutt-users list?
On Sat 06/21/08 at 10:11 AM -0400, Sahil Tandon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why not place all email addressed to mutt-users@ (regardless of the domain name) in your mutt mailbox? Great idea, and I think this is my preferred solution. Thanks for the tip. -- // [EMAIL PROTECTED] //
Re: gbnet address still used for mutt-users list?
A few years ago messages to the mutt-users list (from Germany?) were occasionally ending up in my inbox because they had been sent to what was apparently some sort of alternative address for the list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is anyone aware if this address is still in any way active for the list? That was the original address for the list, before mutt.org began fronting for it. It's still the domain that handles the list though: % host -t mx mutt.org mutt.org mail is handled (pri=10) by dm.gbnet.net mutt.org mail is handled (pri=20) by spamgizmo.flirble.org So it almost certainly still works, and it's probable that some day someone will use it. If it is not, I'd like to remove the following from my .procmailrc: :0 * ^Delivered-To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] $HOME/Mail/m/ Just use a List-* header instead: List-Post: mailto:mutt-users@mutt.org It's too bad Majordomo doesn't offer List-ID, but List-Post will do. -- -D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago
Re: gbnet address still used for mutt-users list?
On Sat 06/21/08 at 02:12 AM -0500, David Champion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it is not, I'd like to remove the following from my .procmailrc: :0 * ^Delivered-To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] $HOME/Mail/m/ Just use a List-* header instead: List-Post: mailto:mutt-users@mutt.org It's too bad Majordomo doesn't offer List-ID, but List-Post will do. Not sure what you mean by use a List-* header -- I'm trying to clean out as much old cruft as possible from my .procmailrc, so I took that recipe out. Doing a imit in the mutt-users list on gbnet revealed a single message from six years ago. The worst I can suffer from removing that recipe is that if someone sends to the list using the gbnet address, it'll go to my inbox, I'll read and/or delete it. Doesn't seem like a big worry given that the last one I got was six years ago: I'd rather have old addresses and recipes I don't need cluttering up my procmailrc. -- // [EMAIL PROTECTED] //
Re: gbnet address still used for mutt-users list?
David Champion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A few years ago messages to the mutt-users list (from Germany?) were occasionally ending up in my inbox because they had been sent to what was apparently some sort of alternative address for the list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is anyone aware if this address is still in any way active for the list? That was the original address for the list, before mutt.org began fronting for it. It's still the domain that handles the list though: % host -t mx mutt.org mutt.org mail is handled (pri=10) by dm.gbnet.net mutt.org mail is handled (pri=20) by spamgizmo.flirble.org So it almost certainly still works, and it's probable that some day someone will use it. This is false. dm.gbnet.net is indeed MX for mutt.org. However, as I already mentioned, that particular address does *not* direct email to this list. You will get a bounce directing you to send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Sahil Tandon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gbnet address still used for mutt-users list?
Russell Hoover [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat 06/21/08 at 02:12 AM -0500, David Champion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it is not, I'd like to remove the following from my .procmailrc: :0 * ^Delivered-To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] $HOME/Mail/m/ Just use a List-* header instead: List-Post: mailto:mutt-users@mutt.org It's too bad Majordomo doesn't offer List-ID, but List-Post will do. Not sure what you mean by use a List-* header -- I'm trying to clean out as much old cruft as possible from my .procmailrc, so I took that recipe out. Doing a imit in the mutt-users list on gbnet revealed a single message from six years ago. Why not place all email addressed to mutt-users@ (regardless of the domain name) in your mutt mailbox? -- Sahil Tandon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gbnet address still used for mutt-users list?
Not sure what you mean by use a List-* header -- I'm trying to clean out
Several RFCs (e.g., 2369, 2919) specify mail headers beginning with
List-. These culminate (I guess) with inclusion in RFC 4021.
Most modern mailing list managers support one or both of List-ID or
List-Post. You can write a single rule or two that will categorize
almost all lists appearing from a mailing list, and dispose of almost
all rules dealing with specific lists.
# Discover mailing lists with List-Post: set
:0
* List-Post: mailto:\/.*
{
# To set LISTNAME to whole posting address:
#LISTNAME=`echo $MATCH | cut -d'' -f1`
# TO set LISTNAME to LHS of posting address:
LISTNAME=`echo $MATCH | cut -d@ -f1`
}
## [insert other rules which update LISTNAME for edge cases]
# File discovered list mail into per-list archives
:0 c
* LISTNAME ?? .
$HOME/Mail/lists/$LISTNAME
# Add X-Label for list name
:0 f
* LISTNAME ?? .
| formail -I X-Label: $LISTNAME
--
-D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago
gbnet address still used for mutt-users list?
A few years ago messages to the mutt-users list (from Germany?) were occasionally ending up in my inbox because they had been sent to what was apparently some sort of alternative address for the list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is anyone aware if this address is still in any way active for the list? If it is not, I'd like to remove the following from my .procmailrc: :0 * ^Delivered-To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] $HOME/Mail/m/ which of course is a recipe for putting any mail sent to that address into my mutt-users-list folder. -- // [EMAIL PROTECTED] //
