autodaemon [was: mailbox classificataion]

[Chris Wilkes]

On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 02:38:03PM -0500, David Relson wrote:
> At 02:04 PM 1/30/03, Clint Adams wrote:
> 
> >> I used not to trust bogofilter to process whole mboxen with -s or -n.
> >> Then I found that it did in fact work ok, and was more than 5 times
> >> faster than processing the same mbox with formail -s bogofilter.  That
> >> is a lot of convenience to throw away, so yes, I'd object strongly to
> >> doing so.
> >
> >I imagine that if the autodaemon stuff were revived and fixed, this
> >wouldn't be an issue.
> 
> I've been thinking about autodaemon as well.  Back in September, I didn't 
> know how bogofilter was supposed to work and adding autodaemon into the 
> picture made it totally unmanageable for me.  Now, at least, I understand 
> bogofilter sans autodaemon.  I think of autodaemon once in a 
> while.  Perhaps in the next few weeks I'll find time to look at it and get 
> it working.

Perhaps I'm missing something here, but isn't part of BF dependant on
getting individual emails and making score counts based off of that?  BF
would have to split up the emails and process them individually, and
adding code to handle different mailbox types would be more added code.

What's so difficult about going the "formail" route?  Or if you have
Maildir formatted mailboxes:
  for i in *; do bogofilter -whatever < $i; done

Chris