Re: Macro -> procmail recipe

[George <d1945@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 12:57:48PM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 04Jun2006 03:16, George <d1945@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> | On Sat, Jun 03, 2006 at 07:26:00PM -0400, Dave Waxman wrote:
> | > I find myself ignoring the same threads in mailings lists constantly.
> [...]
> | # the subject line
> | my $boringthread;
> | 
> | while (<>) {
> |     if ( /^\s*Subject:\s*(.*)/ ) {
> |             $boringthread = $1;
> |     }
> | }
> | 
> | open (FILE, ">>$procmailrc") or die "Flaming death! $!\n";
> | print FILE "$comment $date";
> | print FILE ":0\n";
> | print FILE "* ^Subject: $boringthread\n";
> | print FILE "/dev/null\n\n";
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to be more picky? Your script will pull _every_
> line in the message that even loosely resembles a Subject: line.

I was about to say that I had thought of that, but because there's no 
B/b flag in the procmail recipe and only a single 'Subject:' line in the 
headers ... but that's backwards, isn't it?  Or upside down.  Or maybe 
both.

> How about:
> 
>       while (<>) {
>         chomp;
>         exit 0 if ! length;   # end of headers
>                               # presumably no subject line at all
> 
>         if (/^subject:\s+/i) {
>            ... append to .procmailrc ...
>            exit(0);
>         }
>       }
> 

I think /^Subject:\s+(.*)/ would work better.

> Faster on big messages, since it only reads the headers.
> Guarrenteed to only add one recipe to the procmailrc.

Thanks for the correction.  I think without editing the end result 
(making the script interactive, pulling up the rc file in an editor, 
etc.), this isn't a problem-free approach, but if it provides benefit to 
the OP as is, then I guess it's all good.  If not, there's always the 
more traditional 

        folder-hook . 'push <collapse-all>' 

Regards.

-- 
George