Dallman Ross wrote:
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 04:45:01PM -0700, Kevin Wu wrote:
Does anyone know why procmail behaves inconsistently between
production mode and test mode (see the diagnostic output below)?
Uh, it's not that I don't appreciate your detailed analysis, but it
doesn't answer my question so perhaps I need to restate it. Why does my
recipe as posted fail on the sample traffic report as posted when the
message is delivered in production mode? This recipe used to work until
mid-April. It no longer works. When I log in to my IMAP/file server
running Solaris 9 and test the traffic report on the message in a test
directory using the same platform software on the same message, the
recipe works. This means that procmail is behaving inconsistently, and I
want to know why. Can a sendmail patch applied to Solaris 9 affect
procmail's regexp processing and/or scoring in any way?
Here is a recipe that combines all of these ideas in one. That is,
you don't need the first recipe that dev-nulled things that didn't
contain $LOCATIONS:
:0 B # inside brackets are a space and a tab
* ()\<$LOCATIONS\>
* ! ()\<road[ ]+^?work\>.*(^.+)?(^.+)?^(.*\<)?$LOCATIONS\>
deliver_me
What is supposed to happen if this recipe doesn't execute? In my
procmail setup, the default at the end is to deliver to me (or rather my
inbox). So if this recipe executes, it delivers to me; if it doesn't
execute, it still delivers to me. So this recipe really doesn't do anything.
Suppose that the next recipe is an unconditional delivery to /dev/null.
This recipe still doesn't work. If the traffic report has an accident in
Palo Alto and road work in Menlo Park, the recipe does not execute
because the second condition is not satisfied. Then the subsequent
recipe deletes the report that I wanted to see.
I'll be impressed if anyone can accomplish the goal without scoring (and
without invoking external commands/scripts). Anyone wanting to take on
the challenge should test the proposed solution by subscribing to the
traffic reports: http://beta.kpix.com/news/traffic/mail/ .
However, I'm not looking for a different solution. I want to know why
procmail is behaving inconsistently. Is this a bug in procmail or some
system software on Solaris 9?
Kevin
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail