On Monday, August 5, 2002, at 01:53 AM, Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Aug 2002, Mark Edwards wrote:
>
>> I was wrong in my first assessment. Mail that gets an X-Warning: header
>> does not get copied by the system-filter at all. Here is a log sample:
>>
>> 2002-08-04 14:06:31 H=(qqhrmc.net.cn) [61.138.3.251] Warning: found in bl.
>> spamcop.net
>> 2002-08-04 14:06:32 H0C7YV-0001JU-00 <= 104034.1703urj@???.
>> kr
>> H=(qqhrmc.net.cn) [61.138.3.251] P=esmtp S=7908 id=200208042157.FAA25978@
>> q
>> qhrmc.net.cn
>> 2002-08-04 14:06:32 H0C7YV-0001JU-00 => spam <system-filter> R=localuser
>> T=
>> local_delivery
>> 2002-08-04 14:06:32 H0C7YV-0001JU-00 Completed
>>
>> I'm guessing that this is because of the "if first_delivery then" clause
>> in
>> my system-filter. Does that make sense?
>
> No. But neither does your log match your filter. The log indicates that
> the system filter requested a delivery to the local user "spam". You
> quoted your system filter as:
>
>>>> # Exim filter
>>>>
>>>> # Ignore error messages
>>>> if error_message then finish endif
>>>>
>>>> # Copy if this is the first delivery attempt
>>>> if first_delivery then
>>>> unseen deliver backup@??? errors_to postmaster@???
>>>> endif
Sorry, no. There's an additional aspect of this that I left off the last
message. Considering the amount of posting you do here, I can easily
understand why you've forgotten about it. :) This router is sending the
message to the user "spam":
# The remaining routers handle addresses in the local domain(s).
spam_trap:
driver = redirect
condition = ${if def:h_X-Warning: {yes}{no}}
data = spam
file_transport = address_file
So, the question is why does that router pre-empt the system-filter that I
have (listed above), which works for other messages? The log (above) is
generated with both the router and the system-filter working and active.
Thanks!
--
Mark Edwards
San Francisco, CA
