On Mon, 09 Feb 1998 22:57:27 GMT,
eristic(_at_)gryzmak(_dot_)lodz(_dot_)pdi(_dot_)net
(Marek Jedlinski) wrote:
era eriksson wrote:
BTW, I grepped the procmail manual and all the tutorials I have stashed
away for the "$\" bit and came up with nothing :)
Then you need more escape characters in your regular expression, or
you have a very old manual. (This does not work as expected in 3.10, I
believe. Obviously it's not in the 3.10 manual either, then.)
So we've probably located the problem: my ISP is still running procmail
3.10. I've been asking them to upgrade before... Any way of adjusting your
rule to work with ver 3.10? Will dropping the backslash in $\MATCH work?
Most often it will. There is no way you can be sure. For instance, the
following well-known address:
*(_at_)qz(_dot_)to
(yes, that is a valid address) doesn't match itself when interpreted
as a regex. $\MATCH would give you \*(_at_)qz\(_dot_)to -- the first backslash
is
really significant here, while the second will only prevent accidental
matches on eg. qzoto or whatever. (You are somewhat unlikely to see
addresses like that on most of the Internet, but one rather common
case which also breaks without $\ is user+mailbox(_at_)host(_dot_)com -- the
plus, when interpreted as a regular expression, means "one or more
r:s" but there is nothing there to match the literal plus.)
/* era */
Yes, convince your admin to upgrade, or install your own Procmail in
your private bin directory. It's not extremely big.
--
Paparazzi of the Net: No matter what you do to protect your privacy,
they'll hunt you down and spam you. <http://www.iki.fi/~era/spam/>