------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1290
Summary: 10.13 + 42.24: A patch for two minor, cosmetic, bugs.
Product: Exim
Version: 4.80
Platform: Other
URL: http://git.exim.org/exim.git/blob_plain/HEAD:/doc/doc-
docbook/spec.xfpt
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: bug
Priority: low
Component: Documentation
AssignedTo: nigel@???
ReportedBy: regid23@???
CC: exim-dev@???
A patch for two minor, cosmetic, bugs. As I am not familiar with
the language, I am only guessing.
1. As far as I can see, the first patch fixes the expression
as described in the section 10.11 above.
Which looks to me non grammatically correct. Could it be that the
editor thought about the title, rather then &<<SECThoslispatip>>& ?
2. I think the format of the similar expressions in that section
excludes the single blank character in
hosts = < host list>
, the one in '< h'.
--- a/spec.xfpt 2012-08-24 21:35:19.000000000 +0300
+++ b/spec.xfpt 2012-08-25 00:29:51.000000000 +0300
@@ -8144,7 +8144,7 @@ case the IP address is used on its own.
There are several types of pattern that require Exim to know the name of the
remote host. These are either wildcard patterns or lookups by name. (If a
complete hostname is given without any wildcarding, it is used to find an IP
-address to match against, as described in the section &<<SECThoslispatip>>&
+address to match against, as described in section &<<SECThoslispatip>>&
above.)
If the remote host name is not already known when Exim encounters one of these
@@ -27563,7 +27563,7 @@ encrypted = *
.endd
-.vitem &*hosts&~=&~*&<&'&~host&~list'&>
+.vitem &*hosts&~=&~*&<&'host&~list'&>
.cindex "&%hosts%& ACL condition"
.cindex "host" "ACL checking"
.cindex "&ACL;" "testing the client host"
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugs.exim.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
