Philip:
Thank you for your reply. I will probably write a wrapper that creates
the files as you suggest (I was hoping to avoid this, but such is life).
I want to minimize overhead and complexity by eliminating Procmail.
In the near future the spam filtering application will be re-written to
read the mail messages from STDIN so I won't need to deal with this
issue. The wrapper will suffice in the interim.
Thanks again for your reply, and for bringing us blessed relief from
sendmail.
- John R. S.
Philip Hazel wrote:
>On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, John R. Shearer wrote:
>
>
>
>>I believe that I am having a problem with the order which transports are
>>executed.
>>
>>
>
>I'm not surprised, if you are trying to rely on it. The order in which
>transports are executed is not defined.
>
>
>
>>I am trying to use Exim to replace a sendmail/procmail front-end to a
>>spam filtering system. Odd as it may be, the spam filter needs three
>>input files: one containing the message, one containing just headers and
>>one containing just the body (procmail currently generates these three
>>files and initiates the spam filtering application). I wrote three
>>routers & transports to create the files and a fourth to execute the
>>spam filtering application, passing the file specifications as arguments.
>>
>>
>
>I would advise writing one script to which you pipe the message from
>Exim. Let that script create the files and execute the application. But
>if procmail can do this already, why not just pipe the message to
>procmail?
>
>
>
>>I have tried placing the router which initiates the application after
>>the routers that generate the files, but the routers' transports appear
>>to always be run in reverse order of the router definitions.
>>
>>
>
>All routers run before any transports. Routers take decisions;
>transports carry them out. But not in any defined order.
>
>
>
>>According to
>><http://www.exim.org/exim-html-4.30/doc/html/spec_3.html#SECT3.12>...
>>
>> "Each local delivery runs in a separate process under
>> a non-privileged uid, and they are run in sequence. "
>>
>>Are not my transports considered to be "local deliveries"?
>>
>>
>
>Yes, they are. I should reword that sloppy sentence. For "in sequence",
>please read "one at a time".
>
>I hope this helps,
>Philip
>
>--
>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
>
>--
>
>## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
>
>
>
