Re: [Evolution] Multiple Copies of Messages

["S. Anthony Sequeira" <tony sequeira org uk>]

On Tue, November 23, 2004 13:22, guenther said:
> > > > I much prefer reply-to-list.  The ones who post a message without
> > > > subscribing (bad etiquette IMHO), should know enough to check for
> > > > replies.
> > >
> > > Setting up procmail -once- to eliminate duplicates can save one a
> > > lifetime of futile complaining...
> >
> > Cool, would you happen to have a procmail recipe for doing that please?
> > Or know where I can get one?
>
> If you search the net, you will find this procmail receipt:
>
> # no duplicate Message IDs, please
> :0 Whc: .msgid.lock
> | formail -D 8192 $HOME/.procmail/msgid.cache
>   :0 a:
>   duplicate
>
>
> FWIW: It's basically the same, as I keep talking about to deleted
> duplicate mails based on the Message-Id header.
>
> Please note, that this script doesn't perfectly fit /this/ particular
> issue. Almost all direct copies reach the recipient before the list copy
> does. Which means, the list copy will be dropped (as the Message-Id is
> known) and the private copy will end up in the mail tree. But this copy
> does not have the List-Id header -- which effectively breaks proper
> mailing list filtering...
>
> A workaround to accomplish what you really want should be: Drop all
> mails with known (aka subscribed) mailing list To/Cc headers and without
> any List-Id header. This will drop the personal copy, and the list post
> can be filtered based on proper List-Id header.

See, it starts getting complicated already. ;)  I'll work something out.

> > I don't think complaining is futile, helps to vent steam. :)
>
> Please bear the poor developers, hackers and volunteers in mind, trying
> to help folks...

You *did* see my smiley?  I am very reluctant to make any complaints about
such a fine piece of software as Evolution, and the folks who have put
time and effort into making it into what it is today.

I do however, reserve my right to state my opinions.

> ...guenther

-- 
Tony