Some time around 9/14/2003 14:54:55, I think I heard Andrew Edelstein say:
Not that you should use do this, but this would work:
*
(^From.*senderID@)|(^From(_dot_)*senderID2(_at_)(_dot_)*)|(^From(_dot_)*senderID3(_at_)(_dot_)*)
No, it wouldn't. Procmail needs a single expression. THAT expression can have
multiple expression's within it, using regexp syntax.
Closer to what you're trying to do here would be:
*
(^From(_dot_)*senderID(_at_)(_dot_)*|^From(_dot_)*senderID2(_at_)(_dot_)*|^From(_dot_)*senderID3(_at_)(_dot_)*)
Hello,
Thank you for your comments. You are correct, procmail does
not need parens to group OR'd expressions. I don't know what I was
thinking, duh! But I disagree with your suggestion that my example
wouldn't work. Its redundant, slow and inefficient, sure, but it
would still work. Maybe I'm missing something... :\
In any case, as I mention in my post, there is no reason to
use that condition, and I would be first to mention how poorly
conceived it is; yet my point was to explain *why* his expression
failed, *what* would make it succeed, and *then* show the right way to
do it. Casting the errors of posters aside and answering only with
correctly-formatted strings will fix their immediate problems but will
not help them learn how to do it right.
</rant> :)
-dZ.
--
:[ DZ vs. THE WORLD]==- -- - -
Hating anything, everything and everyone since 1996.
--
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail