On Friday 11 of January 2008, Phil Pennock wrote:
> On 2008-01-11 at 09:02 +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have few rewriting rules that apply to the same address:
> >
> > root@??? "$h_from:" Ffs
> > root@??? "ups@???" Ffs
> >
> > Now first rule fails because of:
>
> Don't you want "${address:$h_from:}" ?
That gives me:
Rewrite of root@??? yielded unparseable address: empty address in
address
and no other rewrite rules are tried.
12:21:06 18367 expanding: $h_from:
12:21:06 18367 result: x@??? <x@???>
12:21:06 18367 expanding: ${address:$h_from:}
12:21:06 18367 result:
>
> Exim quite happily uses multiple rules but you need to avoid giving it
> bad rules. However, you can fail the expansion to force it to continue;
> The Exim Specification, 31.6, "Rewriting replacements":
>
> ----------------------------8< cut here >8------------------------------
> If the expansion is forced to fail by the
> presence of "fail" in a conditional or lookup item, rewriting by the
> current rule is abandoned, but subsequent rules may take effect. Any other
> expansion failure causes the entire rewriting operation to be abandoned,
> and an entry written to the panic log.
> ----------------------------8< cut here >8------------------------------
>
> So yes, you can do:
>
> root@??? "${if def:h_from:{${address:$h_from:}}fail}" Ffs
root@??? "${if eq {${address:$h_from:}}{} {fail}{${address:$h_from:}} }" Ffs
and I get: "Rewrite of root@??? yielded unqualified address "fail""
That doesn't work unfortunately.
> -Phil
--
Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz PLD/Linux Team
arekm / maven.pl http://ftp.pld-linux.org/
