how much beer do I need to get this patch applied?

[Jo Rhett]

On Jun 20, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Daniel Bond wrote:
> I like Kurt's approach

Well the goal is to allow either approach to work.  Kurt is arguing  
against this patch because it doesn't work for him...

> having a mailfilter/script-pipe which could
> remove dynamic variables like timestamps etc, and checksum it against
> against a "empty" template to see if its deletable.
> This also verifies that mail-delivery is working, and machine is  
> not dead.

But thats where the logic fails.  Show me a mailfilter that will  
observe the lack of a message?

Nobody who is against this patch is making logical arguments...

Yes, I agree in theory.  If you have scripts that output a lot of  
data every time and you need to look for anomolies, then a mailfilter/ 
pipe approach makes a lot of sense.  But that doesn't mean that this  
patch is a bad idea.

-- 
Jo Rhett
senior geek

Silicon Valley Colocation
Support Phone: 408-400-0550