On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Marc Haber wrote:
> >Well, that's true, I guess. If you want to allow for that I suppose you
> >need to have some way of remembering whether scanning was completed. For
> >example, in some database.
>
> Yes, but that's bad since the filter can't know whether exim was
> successfully able to complete final delivery. IMO, this bookkeeping
> should be done by the MTA.
I think I am now mis-understanding what you are saying, because this no
longer makes sense to me. If Exim completes the final delivery, the
message will be deleted and the filter will never run again. What have I
not understood here?
> Additionally, the system filter does not have access to the entire
> message.
No, but a "C system filter" with a different API (the same API as
local_scan(), as you suggested) would have. I'm not saying that the
system filter does what you want, just that what you want is in effect
just a slightly different kind of system filter, which might be easier
to implement at the start of delivery instead of at the end of
reception.
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
Get the Exim 4 book: http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book
