"J. Daniel Smith" <J(_dot_)Daniel(_dot_)Smith(_at_)WriteMe(_dot_)com> wrote:
This looks like a false-alarm...neither ^FROM_MAILER nor ^FROM_DAEMON
match the header
From: wje(_at_)netcom(_dot_)com (William J. Evans; mail protected by
spamgard{tm})
at least I don't seem to get those results using 3.11pre7.
^FROM_MAILER has changed between 3.10 and 3.11pre7:
:r! cat p-t
VERBOSE=yes
:0
* ()\/^FROM_MAILER
{
LOG=$MATCH
}
:0
/dev/null
:r! /usr/local/bin/procmail -m p-t < to-test1
procmail: [9666] Thu Oct 2 09:58:45 1997
procmail: Assigning "MATCH="
procmail: Matched "From: wje(_at_)netcom(_dot_)com (William J. Evans; mail
protected by spamgard{tm})
Me"
procmail: Match on "()\/(^(((Resent-)?(From|Sender)|X-Envelope-From):|>?From
)(.*[^((_dot_)%(_at_)a-z0-9])?(Post(ma(st(er)?|n)|office)|(send)?Mail(er)?|daemon|mmdf|root|n?uucp|smtp|response|serv(ices?|er)|Admin(istrator)?)([^).!:a-z0-9].*)?$[^>])"
procmail: Assigning "LOG=From: wje(_at_)netcom(_dot_)com (William J. Evans;
mail protected by spamgard{tm})
Me"
From: wje(_at_)netcom(_dot_)com (William J. Evans; mail protected by
spamgard{tm})
Meprocmail: Assigning "LASTFOLDER=/dev/null"
procmail: Opening "/dev/null"
From Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE!procmail-request Tue Sep 30 11:36:58 1997
Subject: Auto-bouncing mail from the unknown
Folder: /dev/null 2752
:r! ~/usr/bin/procmail -m p-t < to-test1
procmail: [9862] Thu Oct 2 10:02:04 1997
procmail: No match on "()\/(^(((Resent-)?(From|Sender)|X-Envelope-From):|>?From
)([^>]*[^((_dot_)%(_at_)a-z0-9])?(Post(ma(st(er)?|n)|office)|(send)?Mail(er)?|daemon|mmdf|n?uucp|ops|r(esponse|oot)|(bbs\.)?smtp(error)?|s(erv(ices?|er)|ystem)|A(dmin(istrator)?|MMGR))(([^).!:a-z0-9][-_a-z0-9]*)?[%@>
][^<)]*(\(.*\).*)?)?$([^>]|$))"
procmail: Assigning "LASTFOLDER=/dev/null"
procmail: Opening "/dev/null"
From Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE!procmail-request Tue Sep 30 11:36:58 1997
Subject: Auto-bouncing mail from the unknown
Folder: /dev/null 2752
Note that the first ".*" has been changed to "[^>]*"; the addition of
several account names such as "ops", "MMGR", etc; and the much more
elaborate end condition "([^).!:a-z0-9].*)?$[^>]" verus
"(([^).!:a-z0-9][-_a-z0-9]*)?[%@> ][^<)]*(\(.*\).*)?)?$([^>]|$)".
My rant to this was about spamgard, not about the advisability or
inadvisability of using "mail" in an RFC822 comment or phrase.
Elijah
------
I /dev/null dupes, no need to CC list posts. It is not my responsibility to
prove to you my mail is not spam, if mail to you bounces it will not be resent.