[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2
From: |
Ralph Corderoy |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2 |
Date: |
Sun, 15 Mar 2015 00:20:07 +0000 |
Hi Ken,
> Well, like many things whom(1) calls post to do it's dirty work, with
> the undocumented -whom option. So you could short-circuit whom and
> just call post(8) directly. You'll probably need to add an -alias and
> -library option. Or, you could simply check to see if there's a -whom
> argument present to your postproc and if it is do NOT call whom, but
> instead call post(8). Which now that I think about it, I should
> probably do in my script.
Using undocumented options and calling post directly seems wrong.
Checking arguments for -whom tedious. Perhaps this is the occasion when
an environment variable can easily be used to check we've recursed?
Cheers, Ralph.
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/11
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ralph Corderoy, 2015/03/11
- Message not available
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/11
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ken Hornstein, 2015/03/11
- Message not available
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/11
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ralph Corderoy, 2015/03/12
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ken Hornstein, 2015/03/12
- Message not available
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/12
- Message not available
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/12
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2,
Ralph Corderoy <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ken Hornstein, 2015/03/14
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ralph Corderoy, 2015/03/15
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ken Hornstein, 2015/03/15