Hi Phil,
Thanks for the quick response. Supporting arbitrary commands being forcibly
wrapped when they come from a router is exactly what we are needing to accomplish.
I would be happy to attempt to cook up a patch to implement "override_router" and push it to github, or wherever is best?
Thanks
-Nick
On Mar 29, 2013, at 8:25 AM, Phil Pennock <pdp@???> wrote:
> Ideally, <exim-dev@???> for patches.
Posting this to exim-dev instead per your comment.
>
>> We needed a way to force piped commands though a wrapper so I came up with this.
>>
>> https://github.com/bdraco/exim/commit/1c2a22eab9e0a3c9db56da6d3970d3ced0e23036
>
> So there are two sources for commands to a pipe transport. The
> "command" option, which can just be set as:
>
> command = prefix -args -- ${lookup{foo}wherever{normal_wrapped_command}}
>
> The other is the Router providing a command via "$address_pipe", in
> which case command is ignored.
>
> Does `allow_commands` + `restrict_to_path` not do what you need?
>
> I suspect that if we need to support arbitrary commands being forcibly
> wrapped when they come from a Router, it would be simpler, with fewer
> code paths to test and maintain, if we just add a boolean
> "override_router" or somesuch. If that boolean is set true, then we
> still evaluate the "command" option, exactly as before, and the
> administrator can create a Transport which says:
>
> override_router
> command = prefix -args -- $address_pipe
Thats exactly what we need. The commands are coming in from filter filer.
>
> Would this cover your needs?
> Or do the existing facilities cover your
> needs after all?
>
> Regards,
> -Phil
>
