From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1ONYo4-0008O3-Pq for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 22:04:01 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6883FE0A95 for ; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 22:04:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from karnak.local (cpc2-lutn10-2-0-cust603.9-3.cable.virginmedia.com [81.97.90.92]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 050E3E09C7 for ; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 21:17:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karnak.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97E8B3003 for ; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 22:17:13 +0100 (BST) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at karnak.local Received: from karnak.local ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (karnak.local [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UnGUcfanrHiL for ; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 22:17:09 +0100 (BST) Received: from karnak.local (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karnak.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA8693002 for ; Sat, 12 Jun 2010 22:17:08 +0100 (BST) Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 22:17:01 +0100 From: David W Noon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Anything better than procmail? Message-ID: <20100612221701.6420297d@karnak.local> In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Luton Operatic Society X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.5 (GTK+ 2.18.9; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/Ubtd_4KEOSNCDtZg73Tj5Ho"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: c65f5491-fae8-4715-a5e9-24c5bf25c7b6 X-Archives-Hash: 972ec36b99e3357d06c9f6c2d550d634 --Sig_/Ubtd_4KEOSNCDtZg73Tj5Ho Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 21:40:01 +0200, Stroller wrote about [gentoo-user] Anything better than procmail?: >Hi David, > >Your setup looks fairly similar to my own, but I am intrigued by the =20 >differences. Okay. I have been using all kinds of software for handling email, dating back to my OS/2 days in the early 1990's. I regard my current set-up as sweet. >On 12 Jun 2010, at 12:35, David W Noon wrote: >> ... Dovecot, but quickly replaced by dbmail. > >Can I ask you why? Certainly. I wanted the messages to be stored in a single, dedicated logical volume in my DASD farm. Dovecot always stored them in each user's ~/Mail/ directory, so they were all over the /home L.V. In contrast, dbmail uses a database, in my case PostgreSQL, so it is up to the database administrator to decide where they go; but it is always in the one place. This makes for easy backup and restore: a cron jobs runs pg_dump every night on the dbmail database.. >I have found the author of Dovecot to be wonderfully responsive, =20 >pushing out a fix for a deal-breaker issue for my site within hours >of me reporting it. > >> This allows you to use a sieve script, instead of procmail "recipes". > >Can I ask you what the advantage of this is, please? The recipe syntax for procmail is seriously ugly. Sieve looks like most other non-procedural languages from the early 1980's, although it arose in the 1990's. Since I am an old geezer who has been programming since the early 1970's, this syntax felt more comfortable. Sieve is also integrated into dbmail. >Looking at the example at > >, the language looks basically very similar to maildrop, and it =20 >seems to do pretty much the same thing. I have never used maildrop. >The reject syntax seems nice and clear, but if the MX server (for >your email's domain name) has already accepted the message then it's >not really much good rejecting it. In fact, doing so is surely >frowned upon, isn't it? I use a quarantine folder in my IMAP4 account, and my sieve script places spam and infected messages there. Since the physical location is on a logical volume that holds a PostgreSQL tablespace, any malware is not executable, as that L.V. is mounted with "noexec". This is another advantage over placing mail in the /home L.V., in each user's home directory. >> Moreover, each user maintains his/her own sieve script. > >As certainly would be the case with maildrop, and surely too with =20 >procmail? I don't know about maildrop, but procmail is usually managed centrally and hangs off the tail end of Postfix, Exim, Courier or whatever MTA you have. I always switched to root to maintain my delivery recipes, back when I ran procmail. --=20 Regards, Dave [RLU #314465] =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D dwnoon@ntlworld.com (David W Noon) =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D --Sig_/Ubtd_4KEOSNCDtZg73Tj5Ho Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkwT+VQACgkQc9/LpQ70v49jbQCfQ1glGO7vgDJD00JaDFAcaTNG KbAAnA9Y4CqshCgLXvmPjO1uQPQFEoPH =HyQu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/Ubtd_4KEOSNCDtZg73Tj5Ho--