Justin is trying to use this extended sed syntax:
sed -e "s/(user1|user2)/spamreportuser/gi"
To test this I'm simply cating a file at the command line containing
user1
User1
user2
User2
... and getting no substitutions. (That he should redirect the file and
not cat it is another issue.)
I know that's the correct syntax for egrep, awk,
and even Procmail.
Not for plain sed, though. It uses the basic regexps of grep (except
that \n can represent an embedded newline in a search pattern -- but not
in a substition pattern). Also, it doesn't grok the /i modifier.
sed "s/[Uu]ser[12]/spamreportuser/g"
is about as close as you'll get with a straight, unenhanced sed. If the
alternatives are not choices among single characters, then,
sed -e "s/User1/spamreportuser/g" \
-e "s/User2/spamreportuser/g" \
-e "s/user1/spamreportuser/g" \
-e "s/user2/spamreportuser/g"
My advice: get a fancier sed, one that will handle extended regular
expressions and extensions like /i.
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail