Mailing List Archive: spamassassin --report and mutt?

spamassassin --report and mutt?

Feb 13, 2004, 5:11 AM

Post #1 of 3 (703 views)

When flushing spam in mutt, I'd like to pipe them through "spamassassin
--report". If I have 100 spams in the spam folder, and one spamassassin
--report run takes ~5 sec, I'd have to sit and wait for almost ten minutes
to flush the spam folder. And 100 spams is not much...

Doing "| spamassassin --report" instead of "| spamassassin --report" obviously is not a good
solution.

The best I could think of this prototype script that puts the spams in a
spool directory and then feeds them through spamassassin --report one by
one:

http://iki.fi/v/tmp/spam-report

(Sorry, it's ugly).

In mutt I use

macro pager S ":set wait_key=no\n|~/script/spam-report\n:set wait_key=yes\nd"
macro index S ":set wait_key=no\n|~/script/spam-report\n:set wait_key=yes\nd"

Has anyone come up with a more elegant solution?

-- v --

v@iki.fi

Re: spamassassin --report and mutt? [ In reply to ]

bob at proulx

Feb 13, 2004, 10:42 AM

Post #2 of 3 (700 views)

Permalink

Ville Herva wrote:
> In mutt I use
>
> macro pager S ":set wait_key=no\n|~/script/spam-report\n:set wait_key=yes\nd"
> macro index S ":set wait_key=no\n|~/script/spam-report\n:set wait_key=yes\nd"
>
> Has anyone come up with a more elegant solution?

Could you tag all of the spam messages and then ;| them (tag-prefix
pipe-message) them to a script such as 'formail' which would pick them
apart? That would batch them all up. One caveat is that tag piping
does not make a strict mbox format message (in my version of mutt) and
might be a problem for some tools. Try ;| a set of mesages to less
(e.g. ";|less") and browsing the raw format and you will see what I
mean.

Bob

Re: spamassassin --report and mutt? [ In reply to ]

vherva at viasys

Feb 13, 2004, 2:30 PM

Post #3 of 3 (696 views)

Permalink

On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 10:42:51AM -0700, you [Bob Proulx] wrote:
>
> Could you tag all of the spam messages and then ;| them (tag-prefix
> pipe-message) them to a script such as 'formail' which would pick them
> apart? That would batch them all up. One caveat is that tag piping
> does not make a strict mbox format message (in my version of mutt) and
> might be a problem for some tools. Try ;| a set of mesages to less
> (e.g. ";|less") and browsing the raw format and you will see what I
> mean.

I will check the tag pipe approach (I didn't know such feature existed in
mutt :). Thanks.

But I'm not completely sure how this is better than the spool dir hack I
have, since I still need to feed the mail through formail to spamassassin. I
dunno. Perhaps it was naive to think there would be an easier way.

-- v --

v@iki.fi