* Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? @ 1999-01-11 22:08 ` Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-11 23:51 ` Richard Coleman [not found] ` <m3iuedcuua.fsf@peorth.gweep.net> 0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation @ 1999-01-11 22:08 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi folks, I'm at somewhat of an impass. I love Gnus. However I'm running it on a Cyrix 686 150 with 64 Megs na RAM and even so watching Gnus split and filter my incoming mail is _so_mind_blisteringly_slow_ that I simply can't cope anymore :) (Note: I'm NOT slamming Gnus here. It's elisp, and given the number of sexpr's it has to eval per message filtered I think it does a *fine* job. It's just that every time I go to read my mail, it gets more and more painful every day to spend 5+ minutes watching Gnus go *chuggachugga*) So.. Is there a away, maybe with XEmacs in batch mode or whatever, to have some sort of daemonized Gnus process pre-filter my mail so that when I log in it'll be all split as it should be? I looked at using procmail, but the procmail/nnfolder solution seems complex and I want to make sure I'm not missing something before I go convert my 1.5 pages of nnmail-split-methods into procmail syntax. Thanks! -Chris P. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? 1999-01-11 22:08 ` Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation @ 1999-01-11 23:51 ` Richard Coleman 1999-01-12 7:00 ` Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-15 0:53 ` using multiple Summary buffer formats Alfred J Correira [not found] ` <m3iuedcuua.fsf@peorth.gweep.net> 1 sibling, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Richard Coleman @ 1999-01-11 23:51 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: ding > I love Gnus. However I'm running it on a Cyrix 686 150 with 64 Megs na > RAM and even so watching Gnus split and filter my incoming mail is > _so_mind_blisteringly_slow_ that I simply can't cope anymore :) > > (Note: I'm NOT slamming Gnus here. It's elisp, and given the number of > sexpr's it has to eval per message filtered I think it does a *fine* > job. It's just that every time I go to read my mail, it gets more and > more painful every day to spend 5+ minutes watching Gnus go *chuggachugga*) > > So.. Is there a away, maybe with XEmacs in batch mode or whatever, to have > some sort of daemonized Gnus process pre-filter my mail so that when I log > in it'll be all split as it should be? > > I looked at using procmail, but the procmail/nnfolder solution seems complex > and I want to make sure I'm not missing something before I go convert my > 1.5 pages of nnmail-split-methods into procmail syntax. I don't think the procmail solution is very complicated. Don't use procmail to save directly to a nnfolder file. Instead, have it save your messages into multiple (pre-filtered) spool files, which Gnus will incorporate directly into the correct group. There is an entry in the Gnus FAQ that shows exactly how to set this up. It's pretty easy (from the perspective of Gnus). That is assuming you know how to use procmail (which is not that hard). -- Richard Coleman coleman@math.gatech.edu ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? 1999-01-11 23:51 ` Richard Coleman @ 1999-01-12 7:00 ` Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-15 0:53 ` using multiple Summary buffer formats Alfred J Correira 1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation @ 1999-01-12 7:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: ding Richard Coleman <coleman@math.gatech.edu> writes: > > I love Gnus. However I'm running it on a Cyrix 686 150 with 64 Megs na > > RAM and even so watching Gnus split and filter my incoming mail is > > _so_mind_blisteringly_slow_ that I simply can't cope anymore :) > > > > (Note: I'm NOT slamming Gnus here. It's elisp, and given the number of > > sexpr's it has to eval per message filtered I think it does a *fine* > > job. It's just that every time I go to read my mail, it gets more and > > more painful every day to spend 5+ minutes watching Gnus go *chuggachugga*) > > > > So.. Is there a away, maybe with XEmacs in batch mode or whatever, to have > > some sort of daemonized Gnus process pre-filter my mail so that when I log > > in it'll be all split as it should be? > > > > I looked at using procmail, but the procmail/nnfolder solution seems complex > > and I want to make sure I'm not missing something before I go convert my > > 1.5 pages of nnmail-split-methods into procmail syntax. > > I don't think the procmail solution is very complicated. Don't use > procmail to save directly to a nnfolder file. Instead, have it save > your messages into multiple (pre-filtered) spool files, which Gnus will > incorporate directly into the correct group. There is an entry in the > Gnus FAQ that shows exactly how to set this up. It's pretty easy (from > the perspective of Gnus). That is assuming you know how to use > procmail (which is not that hard). Well, yes that's a good point, and thanks for making it, but my issue was that I'm trying to *AVOID* the procmail route. As ratinox pointed out, the splitting process on my system is *WAY TOO SLOW* maybe there's something I'm doing somewhere, I dunno.. -Chris ____________________________________________________________________ |Chris Patti|ICQ#16333120|feoh@cosmic.com|Home #:(617)625-3194|JAPH| |"I have opposable thumbs, and I can buy a rifle. I don't need to | | run from anything." -Todd Finney | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* using multiple Summary buffer formats 1999-01-11 23:51 ` Richard Coleman 1999-01-12 7:00 ` Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation @ 1999-01-15 0:53 ` Alfred J Correira 1999-01-15 10:23 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Alfred J Correira @ 1999-01-15 0:53 UTC (permalink / raw) I've been poking around in the documentation on the Summary buffer for a way to do the following, but I just don't see how to do it simply. Namely, I would like to have one Summary buffer format for all my groups, except my outgoing group (the GCC: group); I would like that one to use a format that displayed, say, the first To: address rather than the usual From: (they're all from me, after all :-). It looks like perhaps I could make up my own function to bind to the gnus-extract-address-components variable, one that checks for my GCC group and does something different than the usual predefined functions when I'm in that group, but that feels wrong to me somehow. Am I missing some obvious existing mechanism that supports what I want to do? (This would for pgnus v0.69 ...) -- Work: Alfred.Correira@GlobeSet.Com PH: 512.427.7715 Home: Correira@Flash.Net FAX: 512.427.5101 PGP: 55 42 BB 2E 17 E9 0D 9C 0B 51 66 58 58 96 1E 45 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: using multiple Summary buffer formats 1999-01-15 0:53 ` using multiple Summary buffer formats Alfred J Correira @ 1999-01-15 10:23 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1999-01-15 10:35 ` Lee Willis 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-15 10:23 UTC (permalink / raw) alfred@GlobeSet.com (Alfred J Correira) writes: > I've been poking around in the documentation on the Summary buffer > for a way to do the following, but I just don't see how to do it > simply. Namely, I would like to have one Summary buffer format > for all my groups, except my outgoing group (the GCC: group); I > would like that one to use a format that displayed, say, the first > To: address rather than the usual From: (they're all from me, > after all :-). It is simple to display the To header for all messages from you. It works like this: First, you tell Gnus to save extra headers in the overview files, and to make use of it: (setq gnus-extra-headers '(To)) (setq nnmail-extra-headers gnus-extra-headers) To actually put the new headers in the old overview files, type M-x nnml-generate-nov-databases RET. To tell Gnus to display the new headers, substitute %n in gnus-summary-line-format with %f. kai -- Abort this operation? [Abort] [Cancel] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: using multiple Summary buffer formats 1999-01-15 10:23 ` Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-15 10:35 ` Lee Willis 1999-01-15 11:13 ` Kai.Grossjohann 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Lee Willis @ 1999-01-15 10:35 UTC (permalink / raw) Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE writes: > It is simple to display the To header for all messages from you. It > works like this: > [Snipped v.good description] This all works beautifully except for one thing. I'd like to have this on for some groups and off or others. ie. I like to see the To: line displayed in my archive groups which contain most of my sent mail. However I have some groups that I GCC: into directly so that I have all my conversations with one person in one folder, and in these I'd like to see the From address ie the old behaviour. As an example O -> mikeb@gbdirect.co.uk Re: Gotta have this logo O -> scoll_methods FAO: J.Creasey Re: Inserting course data O -> Russell Smith Re: Hi -de - hi is great in my archive files but O Jane Gillis (none) O -> Jane Gillis Re: none OA Jane Gillis (none) O -> Jane Gillis Re: none seems less intuitive than O Jane Gillis (none) O Lee Willis Re: none OA Jane Gillis (none) O Lee Willis Re: none in one of my per person groups. Is there an easy way to do this or would it require writing a hook, which I think I can probably do with some trial and error if that's the way to go, I was just wondering if there was an easier way, Lee. -- I was doing object-oriented assembly at 1 year old ... For some reason my mom insists on calling it "Playing with blocks" ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: using multiple Summary buffer formats 1999-01-15 10:35 ` Lee Willis @ 1999-01-15 11:13 ` Kai.Grossjohann [not found] ` <lzww2o21ez.fsf@landlord.gbdirect.co.uk> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-15 11:13 UTC (permalink / raw) Lee Willis <lee@gbdirect.co.uk> writes: > in one of my per person groups. Is there an easy way to do this or would > it require writing a hook, which I think I can probably do with some > trial and error if that's the way to go, I was just wondering if there > was an easier way, The following creates a different format for the nnml:mail.misc and nnml:outgoing groups. I'm sure you see how to do this for other groups. Untested! (defun my-frob-gnus-summary-line-format () (make-local-variable 'gnus-summary-line-format) (if (string-match "nnml:mail.misc\\|nnml:outgoing" gnus-newsgroup-name) (setq gnus-summary-line-format "..value with %f..") (setq gnus-summary-line-format "..value with %n.."))) (add-hook 'gnus-summary-generate-hook 'my-frob-gnus-summary-line-format) Maybe you need a different gnus-summary-*-hook variable. kai -- Abort this operation? [Abort] [Cancel] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <lzww2o21ez.fsf@landlord.gbdirect.co.uk>]
[parent not found: <vaf7luon2dv.fsf@ramses.cs.uni-dortmund.de>]
* Re: using multiple Summary buffer formats [not found] ` <vaf7luon2dv.fsf@ramses.cs.uni-dortmund.de> @ 1999-01-15 12:34 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1999-01-15 13:04 ` Lee Willis 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-15 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw) Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE writes: > But from the name, it seems that *-prepare-hook is the right place. > Hm. If that doesn't work, ask Lars. Arg! I forgot gnus-ignored-from-addresses. You must set gnus-ignored-from-addresses. Sorry. Does it work now? kai -- Abort this operation? [Abort] [Cancel] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: using multiple Summary buffer formats 1999-01-15 12:34 ` Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-15 13:04 ` Lee Willis 1999-01-15 14:27 ` Karl Kleinpaste 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Lee Willis @ 1999-01-15 13:04 UTC (permalink / raw) Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE writes: > Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE writes: > > > But from the name, it seems that *-prepare-hook is the right place. > > Hm. If that doesn't work, ask Lars. > > Arg! I forgot gnus-ignored-from-addresses. You must set > gnus-ignored-from-addresses. Yep, I've done that. It's recognizing me fine, and displaying to To: address in every folder for mails sent by me. The problem is that I can't get it to show the From address in some groups. The code you sent seems to be working in that it sets a local copy of gnus-summary-line-format correctly, but this value doesn't seem to be used when creating the summary. It uses the global one instead. Lars? Lee. -- I was doing object-oriented assembly at 1 year old ... For some reason my mom insists on calling it "Playing with blocks" ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: using multiple Summary buffer formats 1999-01-15 13:04 ` Lee Willis @ 1999-01-15 14:27 ` Karl Kleinpaste 1999-01-19 14:54 ` Jack Vinson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Karl Kleinpaste @ 1999-01-15 14:27 UTC (permalink / raw) I suggest use of gnus-group-select-hook instead. This is mine: (setq gnus-select-group-hook (function (lambda () ;; Ignore From: in summary for certain groups. (cond ((string-match "clari." gnus-newsgroup-name) (setq gnus-summary-line-format "%U%R%z%I%(%[%4L: %-6,6n%]%) %s\n")) ((string-match "comp.sources" gnus-newsgroup-name) (setq gnus-summary-line-format "%U%R%z%I%(%[%4L%]%) %s\n")) (t (setq gnus-summary-line-format "%U%R%z%I%(%[%4L: %-20,20f%]%) %s\n"))) ;; Put full newsgroup name in summary mode line for nnir. (setq gnus-summary-mode-line-format (if (string-match "nnir:" gnus-newsgroup-name) "Gnus: %G [%A] %Z" "Gnus: %g [%A] %Z")) ;; Convince certain mailing lists that their trailers are Bad. (if (string-match "list.\\(guns\\|pa-pol\\|pabdsm\\|leatherparent\\|trpn\\|y2kprep\\)" gnus-newsgroup-name) (add-hook 'gnus-article-display-hook 'gnus-article-hide-signature t) (remove-hook 'gnus-article-display-hook 'gnus-article-hide-signature)) )) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: using multiple Summary buffer formats 1999-01-15 14:27 ` Karl Kleinpaste @ 1999-01-19 14:54 ` Jack Vinson 1999-01-19 15:15 ` Lee Willis 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Jack Vinson @ 1999-01-19 14:54 UTC (permalink / raw) >>>>> "KK" == Karl Kleinpaste <karl@justresearch.com> writes: KK> I suggest use of gnus-group-select-hook instead. This is mine: Another option is to create your own format-function to handle this. Since I use BBDB to extract user names for mail, the tricks to show the To: information in some groups is more difficult. This is what my setup looks like. Instead of %-20,20f, I have %-20,20ud to indicate use of the gnus-user-format-function-d. The function simply checks the group name and does either gnus-summary-from-or-to-or-newsgroups (the %f behavior) or bbdb/gnus-summary-get-author (the %uB behavior). (setq gnus-summary-line-format "%U%R%z%I%(%[%4L: %-20,20ud%]%) %s\n") (defun gnus-user-format-function-d (group-tmp) "Decide to use either the BBDB function or the %f form." (let ((group gnus-newsgroup-name)) ;; Set the Summary Line Format special for outgoing archives (if (and group (string-match "\\(drafts\\|misc-\\(mail\\|news\\)\\)" group)) ;; gnus-tmp-header is defined in the calling function (gnus-summary-from-or-to-or-newsgroups group-tmp) (bbdb/gnus-summary-get-author group-tmp) )) ) -- Jack Vinson <jvinson@chevax.ecs.umass.edu> http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~vinson/ Zippy: Did you GAIN WEIGHT in th' past 5 MINUTES or am I just DREAMING of two BROCCOLI FLORETS lying in an empty GAS TANK? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: using multiple Summary buffer formats 1999-01-19 14:54 ` Jack Vinson @ 1999-01-19 15:15 ` Lee Willis 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Lee Willis @ 1999-01-19 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw) Jack Vinson <jvinson@chevax.ecs.umass.edu> writes: > >>>>> "KK" == Karl Kleinpaste <karl@justresearch.com> writes: > > Another option is to create your own format-function to handle this. [Snipped code] Which works brilliantly, except I'd prefer it to show the From line rather than the BBDB entry, but for the moment it's working very nicely. Thanks a lot Jack. Lee. -- I was doing object-oriented assembly at 1 year old ... For some reason my mom insists on calling it "Playing with blocks" ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <m3iuedcuua.fsf@peorth.gweep.net>]
* Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? [not found] ` <m3iuedcuua.fsf@peorth.gweep.net> @ 1999-01-12 7:57 ` Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-12 16:02 ` Kai.Grossjohann 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation @ 1999-01-12 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw) Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> writes: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > "AAR" == Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation <feoh@cosmic.com> writes: > > AAR> (Note: I'm NOT slamming Gnus here. It's elisp, and given the number > AAR> of sexpr's it has to eval per message filtered I think it does a > AAR> *fine* job. It's just that every time I go to read my mail, it gets > AAR> more and more painful every day to spend 5+ minutes watching Gnus go > AAR> *chuggachugga*) > > 5 *MINUTES*? Gnus and FSF Emacs 19.34 on old 486 DX2-50 with 12Mb RAM, > running Windows 95, would split a 250-message mail spool file in under 30 > seconds. This was using nnml, the slowest-writing backend available to > Gnus, on a VFAT filesystem, one of the slowest filesystems available on any > OS running on the Intel architecture. > > I think there is something seriously wrong with your system, not Gnus. To answer my own question: I'm seeing a total performance turnaround once I re-wrote my .gnus file and minimized the length and complexity of the regexes I'm filtering on. I'd written the thing in the early days before I got used to how emacs groks regexes, and was being *extremely* paranoid about full hostnames, etc. -Chris ____________________________________________________________________ |Chris Patti|ICQ#16333120|feoh@cosmic.com|Home #:(617)625-3194|JAPH| |"I have opposable thumbs, and I can buy a rifle. I don't need to | | run from anything." -Todd Finney | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? 1999-01-12 7:57 ` Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation @ 1999-01-12 16:02 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1999-01-12 16:38 ` Hrvoje Niksic 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-12 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation <feoh@cosmic.com> writes: > I'm seeing a total performance turnaround once I re-wrote my .gnus > file and minimized the length and complexity of the regexes I'm > filtering on. Ah. Why didn't I think of this? Since the Day of the Posixification of Regexes, regex matching has been rather slower for a number of regexes; and I'm not sure whether the fact that they're posixly correct now should be considered a Good Thing... kai -- Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out there to get me! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? 1999-01-12 16:02 ` Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-12 16:38 ` Hrvoje Niksic 1999-01-12 17:00 ` M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus?) Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-12 17:21 ` Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Hrvoje Niksic @ 1999-01-12 16:38 UTC (permalink / raw) Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE writes: > Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation <feoh@cosmic.com> writes: > > > I'm seeing a total performance turnaround once I re-wrote my .gnus > > file and minimized the length and complexity of the regexes I'm > > filtering on. > > Ah. Why didn't I think of this? Since the Day of the > Posixification of Regexes, regex matching has been rather slower for > a number of regexes; and I'm not sure whether the fact that they're > posixly correct now should be considered a Good Thing... Strange. Two remarks, though (none of which is meant to argue with you): 1) As demonstrated by Tom Lord, GNU regex (which both Emacsen use) is still not POSIX. 2) Why are there, at least in XEmacs, two sets of functions, posix- regexp functions, and "normal" regexp functions? Also, the internal code has various posix-p flags that apparently specify whether POSIX behaviour is desired. I though the reason for duplicate functionality was to gain speed in the non-POSIX (the more usual) case. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus?) 1999-01-12 16:38 ` Hrvoje Niksic @ 1999-01-12 17:00 ` Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-12 17:35 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1999-01-12 20:49 ` M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: " Jari Aalto+mail.procmail 1999-01-12 17:21 ` Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 1 sibling, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation @ 1999-01-12 17:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: ding Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> writes: > Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE writes: > > > Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation <feoh@cosmic.com> writes: > > > > > I'm seeing a total performance turnaround once I re-wrote my .gnus > > > file and minimized the length and complexity of the regexes I'm > > > filtering on. > > > > Ah. Why didn't I think of this? Since the Day of the > > Posixification of Regexes, regex matching has been rather slower for > > a number of regexes; and I'm not sure whether the fact that they're > > posixly correct now should be considered a Good Thing... > > Strange. Two remarks, though (none of which is meant to argue with > you): > > 1) As demonstrated by Tom Lord, GNU regex (which both Emacsen use) is > still not POSIX. > > 2) Why are there, at least in XEmacs, two sets of functions, posix- > regexp functions, and "normal" regexp functions? Also, the > internal code has various posix-p flags that apparently specify > whether POSIX behaviour is desired. I though the reason for > duplicate functionality was to gain speed in the non-POSIX (the > more usual) case. Hrrm. I'm not sure whether or not XEmacs' regexps Posixness or lack thereof is the determining faactor here. I suspect a dash of clue and a *MUCH* less complex string to parse per each filter are the cause. Here's the first bits of my nnmail-split-methods, old and new: OLD: <Note: There are several syntactically legal but obviously broken expressions here, this didn't help in any case :)> (setq nnmail-split-methods '(("mail.imagine" ".*owner-imagine@MAELSTROM\.STJOHNS\.EDU") ("mail.mesa" "Return-Path:.*mesa.*.BR.*") ("mail.kaffe" "Sender:.*kaffe@w3\.org") ("mail.0xdeadbeef" ".*0xdeadbeef@substance\.abuse\.blackdown\.org") ("mail.0xdeadbeef" "To:.*0xdeadbeef@substance.abuse.blackdown.org") ("mail.linux-kernel" "linux-kernel@vger\.rutgers\.edu") ("mail.linux-smp" "linux-smp@vger\.rutgers\.edu") ("mail.linux-net" "linux-net@vger\.rutgers\.edu") ("mail.linux-gcc" "linux-gcc@vger\.rutgers\.edu") ("mail.linux-svgalib" "linux-svgalib@vger\.rutgers\.edu") ("mail.linux-tape" "linux-tape@vger\.rutgers\.edu") ("mail.linux-scsi" "linux-scsi@vger\.rutgers\.edu") ... NEW: (setq nnmail-split-methods ("mail.imagine" "owner-imagine@") ("mail.0xdeadbeef" "0xdeadbeef@") ("mail.gnus" "ding@gnus\.org") ("mail.gimp" "gimp-.+@") ("mail.hwg-languages" "hwg-languages@") ("mail.hwg-critique" "hwg-critique@") ("mail.hwg-software" "hwg-software@") ("mail.squeak" "squeak@cs\.uiuc\.edu") ("mail.boston-pm" "boston-pm@") ("mail.perldl" "perldl@") ("mail.freshmeat" "freshmeat-news@") ... You get the idea. To at least somewhat quantify my performance boost, a mail spool of approx. 100 messages used to take on the order of a minute plus some slop. The same spool now filters in a little under 3 seconds :) Yay. I don't have to mess with procmail :) -Chris (I personally still favor pre versus post processing, but the pain is gone so I'll move on to the next egregious wound and call it a win :) ____________________________________________________________________ |Chris Patti|ICQ#16333120|feoh@cosmic.com|Home #:(617)625-3194|JAPH| |"I have opposable thumbs, and I can buy a rifle. I don't need to | | run from anything." -Todd Finney | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus?) 1999-01-12 17:00 ` M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus?) Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation @ 1999-01-12 17:35 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1999-01-12 18:42 ` Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-12 20:49 ` M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: " Jari Aalto+mail.procmail 1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-12 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw) Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation <feoh@cosmic.com> writes: > (setq nnmail-split-methods > '(("mail.imagine" ".*owner-imagine@MAELSTROM\.STJOHNS\.EDU") > ("mail.mesa" "Return-Path:.*mesa.*.BR.*") > ("mail.kaffe" "Sender:.*kaffe@w3\.org") > ("mail.0xdeadbeef" ".*0xdeadbeef@substance\.abuse\.blackdown\.org") > ("mail.0xdeadbeef" "To:.*0xdeadbeef@substance.abuse.blackdown.org") > ("mail.linux-kernel" "linux-kernel@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > ("mail.linux-smp" "linux-smp@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > ("mail.linux-net" "linux-net@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > ("mail.linux-gcc" "linux-gcc@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > ("mail.linux-svgalib" "linux-svgalib@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > ("mail.linux-tape" "linux-tape@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > ("mail.linux-scsi" "linux-scsi@vger\.rutgers\.edu") I'm sure that these can be made faster by always using the header name (a number of these don't have headers), and by prefixing the header name with "^" (which means at beginning of line). To be specific: the "mail.kaffe" regex could be "^Sender:.*kaffe@w3.org". Also, note that the Lisp reader expands "\." to "." so "foo\.bar" and "foo.bar" are the same. If you want to match a dot, use "\\.". kai -- Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out there to get me! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus?) 1999-01-12 17:35 ` Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-12 18:42 ` Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-13 22:35 ` Kai.Grossjohann 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation @ 1999-01-12 18:42 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: ding Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE writes: > Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation <feoh@cosmic.com> writes: > > > (setq nnmail-split-methods > > '(("mail.imagine" ".*owner-imagine@MAELSTROM\.STJOHNS\.EDU") > > ("mail.mesa" "Return-Path:.*mesa.*.BR.*") > > ("mail.kaffe" "Sender:.*kaffe@w3\.org") > > ("mail.0xdeadbeef" ".*0xdeadbeef@substance\.abuse\.blackdown\.org") > > ("mail.0xdeadbeef" "To:.*0xdeadbeef@substance.abuse.blackdown.org") > > ("mail.linux-kernel" "linux-kernel@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > > ("mail.linux-smp" "linux-smp@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > > ("mail.linux-net" "linux-net@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > > ("mail.linux-gcc" "linux-gcc@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > > ("mail.linux-svgalib" "linux-svgalib@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > > ("mail.linux-tape" "linux-tape@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > > ("mail.linux-scsi" "linux-scsi@vger\.rutgers\.edu") > > I'm sure that these can be made faster by always using the header name > (a number of these don't have headers), and by prefixing the header > name with "^" (which means at beginning of line). > > To be specific: the "mail.kaffe" regex could be > "^Sender:.*kaffe@w3.org". > > Also, note that the Lisp reader expands "\." to "." so "foo\.bar" and > "foo.bar" are the same. If you want to match a dot, use "\\.". > > kai I did that in the New: section, dunno if you caught that :) Thanks for pointing out the thing about \. versus \\. though. Clearly I need to go bash my head against the emacs-isms I'm not getting. Oh for a single regexp standard :) I say we declare "Perl" and be done with it. <duck> -Chris ____________________________________________________________________ |Chris Patti|ICQ#16333120|feoh@cosmic.com|Home #:(617)625-3194|JAPH| |"I have opposable thumbs, and I can buy a rifle. I don't need to | | run from anything." -Todd Finney | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus?) 1999-01-12 18:42 ` Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation @ 1999-01-13 22:35 ` Kai.Grossjohann 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-13 22:35 UTC (permalink / raw) Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation <feoh@cosmic.com> writes: > I did that in the New: section, dunno if you caught that :) Hm? I suggested using "^" and "\\.", neither were used in the `new' section (nor in the `old' section, for that matter). I suggested an additional possibility for making it faster (though I haven't actually tested it, so it's just a stab in the dark). You did make it faster in the `new' section, though :-) but by other means. kai -- Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out there to get me! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: maiil splitting under Gnus?) 1999-01-12 17:00 ` M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus?) Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-12 17:35 ` Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-12 20:49 ` Jari Aalto+mail.procmail 1999-01-13 22:32 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Jari Aalto+mail.procmail @ 1999-01-12 20:49 UTC (permalink / raw) * 1999-01-12 Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation <feoh@cosmic.com> | To at least somewhat quantify my performance boost, a mail spool of | approx. 100 messages used to take on the order of a minute plus some | slop. The same spool now filters in a little under 3 seconds :) The Gnus and Procmail are two diffrent methods. The Prcmail is always there and filtering the mail, whereas you have to keep Gnus running or active to have mail split. If I take a vacation or Gnus(Emacs) process dies, the procmail still cruches the messages to right folders. In addition reading the groups with new mail take no time at all :-) All of your Maling lists could have been trapped with simple procmail module call: # ~/.procmailrc start PMSRC = $HOME/.procmail # procmail module source directory SPOOL = $HOME/Mail/spool # The Gnus procmail spool INCLUDERC = $PMSRC/pm-jalist.rc # see if this the mailing list message # if this was mailing list, drop to mailing list folder. The mailing # list name is already derived to LIST # # linux-announce --> $HOME/Mail/spool/list.linux-announce.spool :0 : * LIST ?? [a-z] $SPOOL/list.$LIST.spool # end ~/.procmailrc This same recipe adaptively finds any new mailing list you may subsribe to. jari ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: maiil splitting under Gnus?) 1999-01-12 20:49 ` M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: " Jari Aalto+mail.procmail @ 1999-01-13 22:32 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1999-01-13 23:21 ` Hrvoje Niksic 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-13 22:32 UTC (permalink / raw) jari.aalto@poboxes.com (Jari Aalto+mail.procmail) writes: > The Gnus and Procmail are two diffrent methods. The Prcmail is > always there and filtering the mail, whereas you have to keep Gnus > running or active to have mail split. Mail is split when Gnus starts. Is that not sufficient? Except for the possible problem of the regex matching thingy taking quite some time when done all in one go. I agree that this might be an issue for some people. kai -- Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out there to get me! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: maiil splitting under Gnus?) 1999-01-13 22:32 ` Kai.Grossjohann @ 1999-01-13 23:21 ` Hrvoje Niksic 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Hrvoje Niksic @ 1999-01-13 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw) Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE writes: > jari.aalto@poboxes.com (Jari Aalto+mail.procmail) writes: > > > The Gnus and Procmail are two diffrent methods. The Prcmail is > > always there and filtering the mail, whereas you have to keep Gnus > > running or active to have mail split. > > Mail is split when Gnus starts. Is that not sufficient? It's not, if you want things getting done when mail arrives, as is usually done with mail robots or vacation programs. In Both Gnus and procmail, you can execute code when (certain types of) mail arrives. Obviously, procmail is much better suited for tasks of that kind. For this reason, I use two layers of mail filtering; one procmail-based, for the stuff that needs to get done as soon as the mail arrives, and one Gnus-based for normal mailing-list splitting. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? 1999-01-12 16:38 ` Hrvoje Niksic 1999-01-12 17:00 ` M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus?) Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation @ 1999-01-12 17:21 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen @ 1999-01-12 17:21 UTC (permalink / raw) Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> writes: > 1) As demonstrated by Tom Lord, GNU regex (which both Emacsen use) is > still not POSIX. > > 2) Why are there, at least in XEmacs, two sets of functions, posix- > regexp functions, and "normal" regexp functions? Also, the > internal code has various posix-p flags that apparently specify > whether POSIX behaviour is desired. I though the reason for > duplicate functionality was to gain speed in the non-POSIX (the > more usual) case. My understanding of this is that certain Posixly things were incorporated -- in specific, a more complex backtracking thing. Backtracking can be very slow, so the non-Posix functions use a simpler version. So the naming is misleading -- it should probably be excessive-backtracking-p instead of posix-p, but the latter rolls more easily off the tongue, perhaps. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1999-01-19 15:15 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 23+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <feoh@cosmic.com> 1999-01-11 22:08 ` Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-11 23:51 ` Richard Coleman 1999-01-12 7:00 ` Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-15 0:53 ` using multiple Summary buffer formats Alfred J Correira 1999-01-15 10:23 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1999-01-15 10:35 ` Lee Willis 1999-01-15 11:13 ` Kai.Grossjohann [not found] ` <lzww2o21ez.fsf@landlord.gbdirect.co.uk> [not found] ` <vaf7luon2dv.fsf@ramses.cs.uni-dortmund.de> 1999-01-15 12:34 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1999-01-15 13:04 ` Lee Willis 1999-01-15 14:27 ` Karl Kleinpaste 1999-01-19 14:54 ` Jack Vinson 1999-01-19 15:15 ` Lee Willis [not found] ` <m3iuedcuua.fsf@peorth.gweep.net> 1999-01-12 7:57 ` Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-12 16:02 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1999-01-12 16:38 ` Hrvoje Niksic 1999-01-12 17:00 ` M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus?) Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-12 17:35 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1999-01-12 18:42 ` Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation 1999-01-13 22:35 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1999-01-12 20:49 ` M-x gnus-filter-mail-at-warp-10 (was: " Jari Aalto+mail.procmail 1999-01-13 22:32 ` Kai.Grossjohann 1999-01-13 23:21 ` Hrvoje Niksic 1999-01-12 17:21 ` Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus? Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).