Why can't I use procmail

Why can't I use procmail

[Fredrik Staxeng]

This has been irritating me ever since I started to use GNUS. It is 
mentioned in the FAQ, but I find the explanation less than satisfying.

Could somebody that knows please explain? Also please explain why
procmail/mh can do it, but gnus can't? Is there something accessible
from C (O_CREAT|O_EXCL?) that is not accesible from Lisp? Is this
about NFS?

I already use the spool file workaround, so you don't have to tell me about
that.

-- 
Fredrik Stax\"ang | rot13: sfgk@hcqngr.hh.fr

Re: Why can't I use procmail

[Fredrik Staxeng]

Reiner Steib <4uce.02.r.steib@gmx.net> writes:

> On Mon, Sep 30 2002, Fredrik Staxeng wrote:
> 
> > This has been irritating me ever since I started to use GNUS. It is 
> > mentioned in the FAQ, but I find the explanation less than satisfying.
> 
> Which point in the FAQ do you mean?
> <URL:http://my.gnus.org/FAQ/#id2753901> (8. Procmail and Gnus)?

Of course. I didn't see the first sentence. It could mean that it now
works, but I can't find anything about it in the manual. Does it 
in fact work? 

> > Could somebody that knows please explain? Also please explain why
> > procmail/mh can do it, but gnus can't? 
> 
> ,----[ <info://gnus/MH+Spool> ]
> |    `nnmh' is just like `nnml', except that is doesn't generate NOV
> | databases and it doesn't keep an active file or marks file.  This makes
> | `nnmh' a _much_ slower back end than `nnml', but it also makes it
> | easier to write procmail scripts for.
> `----

But I really want to use nnml.

-- 
Fredrik Stax\"ang | rot13: sfgk@hcqngr.hh.fr

Re: Why can't I use procmail

[David S Goldberg]

>>>>> On 30 Sep 2002 20:17:14 +0200, Fredrik Staxeng
>>>>> <fstx+u@update.uu.se> said: 

> But I really want to use nnml.

Then you need a procmail script that updates the overview file as it
stores the message and convincing gnus to re-read the overview as
necessary.  I have no idea how hard that might be.

-- 
Dave Goldberg
david.goldberg6@verizon.net

Re: Why can't I use procmail

[Fredrik Staxeng]

David S Goldberg <david.goldberg6@verizon.net> writes:

> >>>>> On 30 Sep 2002 20:17:14 +0200, Fredrik Staxeng
> >>>>> <fstx+u@update.uu.se> said: 
> 
> > But I really want to use nnml.
> 
> Then you need a procmail script that updates the overview file as it
> stores the message and convincing gnus to re-read the overview as
> necessary.  I have no idea how hard that might be.

Updating the overview file is not hard (just look at it), updating the
active file isn't hard either, and gnus would presumably reread both
when I do g in the groups buffer. I was thinking of doing a small hack in
C that gets invoked by procmail and does the storing. 

As far as I can see the problem is that GNUS and my program would
decide to use the same filename, but that would be solved on the C
side by using (O_CREAT|O_EXCL).  GNUS/Emacs would need to do the
same. Also a lock file might be needed for the active file.

I could probably live with never moving messages to autodelivered folders,
or using a forward to myself+foldername@localhost as a workaround.

-- 
Fredrik Stax\"ang | rot13: sfgk@hcqngr.hh.fr

Re: Why can't I use procmail

[Fredrik Staxeng]

prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:

> Fredrik Staxeng <fstx+u@update.uu.se> wrote:
> > But I really want to use nnml.
> 
> Exactly what is it about nnml that you like?  If you're willing to use
> Oort, you might like nnmaildir.  It's designed to allow concurrent
> delivery to the maildirs it uses as groups.

The performance. I have 900 mails in one folder, yet there is no
reason not to just hit return when gnus asks me how many messages
it should fetch.

But the important question remains unanswered. Is the message
"don't do this! you will lose mail!" still valid?

-- 
Fredrik Stax\"ang | rot13: sfgk@hcqngr.hh.fr

Re: Why can't I use procmail

[Paul Jarc]

Fredrik Staxeng <fstx+u@update.uu.se> wrote:
> prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:
>> Fredrik Staxeng <fstx+u@update.uu.se> wrote:
>>> But I really want to use nnml.
>>
>> Exactly what is it about nnml that you like?  If you're willing to use
>> Oort, you might like nnmaildir.  It's designed to allow concurrent
>> delivery to the maildirs it uses as groups.
>
> The performance.

I've been told nnmaildir feels faster than nnml, except for its slow
startup.  Beware that nnmaildir uses lots of small files, so if your
filesystem doesn't deal well with that, it might not be very fast for
you.  I use ReiserFS.

> But the important question remains unanswered. Is the message
> "don't do this! you will lose mail!" still valid?

Oort has been pretty safe so far.  But it's always good to have
backups.


paul