On 30-Mar-01 at 08:33:08 Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, Phil Pennock wrote:
>> So why do you need autoreply, as opposed to, say, pipe?
>
> I suspect he wants the "once" feature.
>
Correct - I need the 'once' and 'log' autoreply options to operate, hence I
must (?) use autoreply. The 'touch' is additonally something I want to
happen. I did mention this :-)
> A quick question for you to think about :-) Without all the gory details
> what I require is an autoreply transport which updates the 'log' and
> 'once' files, but which does not actually send any message back to the
> user.
John.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Horne, University of Plymouth, UK Tel: +44 (0)1752 233914
E-mail: jhorne@???
PGP key available from public key servers
