Re: [Exim] Not your normal SMTP-Auth problem?

Both my plain and my login authenticators are broken under 3.34. I ran with full debug mode, but I was never able to see any more information than what was in my prior post. Here are my two authenticators:

plain:
driver = plaintext
public_name = PLAIN
server_condition = "${if and {{!eq{$2}{}}{!eq{$3}{}} {crypteq{$3}{${extract{2}{:} {${lookup mysql{select password_hash from popbox where mbox_name = '${local_part:$2}' and domain_name = '${domain:$2}'} {$value}{fail}}}}}}}{1}{0}}"
server_set_id = $2

login:
driver = plaintext
public_name = LOGIN
server_prompts = "Username:::Password::"
server_condition = "${if and {{!eq{$1}{}}{!eq{$2}{}} \
{crypteq{$2}{${extract{2}{:} \
{${lookup mysql{select password_hash from popbox where mbox_name = '${local_part:$1}' and domain_name = '${domain:$1}'} \
{$value}{fail}}}}}}}{1}{0}}"
server_set_id = $1


On Tue,  8 Jan 2002 21:57:17 -0500, Patrice Fournier wrote:
>Quoting Daniel Einspanjer <daniel-ml@???>:
>
>> I'm one of the few people who got SMTP-Auth set up with relatively
>> little difficulty a year ago, and today I decided to upgrade from
>> 3.22 to 3.34.  It says that 3.32 is the latest stable code, but
>> looking at the changelog from .32 to .34, I didn't see anything that
>> seemed to be serious.. maybe I was wrong?
>
>The website has not been updated...
>
>> In 3.22, after exim cracks the encrypted authentication string, it
>> states "expanded string: 1".
>> In 3.34, it is "expanded string: 0".
>> 
>> Does anyone have any ideas what this string is that isn't being
>> expanded, and why?  Here is a quick side-by-side.
>> 
>> plain authenticator:                 plain authenticator:
>> $1 =                                 $1 =
>> $2 = daniel@???               $2 = daniel@???
>> $3 = TestPassword                    $3 = TestPassword
>> expanded string: 1                   expanded string: 0
>> SMTP>> 235 Auth succeeded            SMTP>> 535 Incorrect auth data
>> 235 Authentication succeeded         535 Incorrect authentication data
>
>How about giving your plaintext authenticator section (they are the same
>in both version I suppose) so we could see what is expanded?
>