Your message dated Mon, 7 Nov 2005 12:32:23 +0100 (CET)
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
has caused the Debian Bug report #334364,
regarding procmailrc man page clarification for 'E' flag
to be marked as having been forwarded to the upstream software
author(s) Procmail Bugs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 334364-forwarded) by bugs.debian.org; 7 Nov 2005 11:33:39 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 07 03:33:39 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from pizarro.unex.es [158.49.8.2] (postfix)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EZ5Fq-0000y8-00; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 03:33:39 -0800
Received: from localhost (almendralejo.unex.es [158.49.8.199])
by pizarro.unex.es (Postfix/MJ-1.08) with ESMTP id F0C1FD13BC;
Mon, 7 Nov 2005 12:33:36 +0100 (CET)
Received: from pizarro.unex.es ([158.49.8.2])
by localhost (emilio [158.49.17.20]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 30017-10; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 12:36:08 +0100 (CET)
Received: from guadiana.unex.es (guadiana.unex.es [158.49.17.23])
by pizarro.unex.es (Postfix/MJ-1.08) with ESMTP id 33942D130E;
Mon, 7 Nov 2005 12:33:23 +0100 (CET)
Received: from cantor.unex.es ([158.49.18.105])
by guadiana.unex.es with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 1EZ5Fb-0001FE-00; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 12:33:23 +0100
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 12:32:23 +0100 (CET)
From: Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Procmail Bugs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Bug#334364: procmailrc man page clarification for 'E' flag (fwd)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at unex.es
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-11.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER,
HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=ham version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
Hello.
I received this from the Debian bug system.
[ Please keep the Cc: lines when replying ].
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 15:51:16 +0200
Subject: Bug#334364: procmailrc man page clarification for 'E' flag
Package: procmail
Version: 3.22-11
Severity: normal
The procmailrc(5) man page says:
E This recipe only executes if the immediately preceding recipe
was not executed. Execution of this recipe also disables any
immediately following recipes with the 'E' flag. This allows
you to specify `else if' actions.
There are two problems:
First, the work "execute" is used for two different meanings in the
first sentence, which should be:
This recipe is considered [or examined] only if [...]
Also, when there are several chained recipes with an 'E' flag, I don't
think the documented behavior is correct. Let's consider the following
example:
:0
* condition A
{ ... }
:0 E
* condition B
{ ... }
:0 E
* condition C
{ ... }
and let's assume that condition A is satisfied, so that the first
recipe is executed. Then the second recipe is not considered. But
what about the third one, assuming condition C is satisfied too?
1. The immediately preceding recipe is the second one and it was not
executed. So, the first sentence does not prevent the recipe from
being considered.
2. The second sentence does not apply since the first recipe does not
have the 'E' flag.
So, according to the documentation, the third recipe should be
considered (and executed, assuming condition C is satisfied),
and this wouldn't really be "else if" actions.
I suppose that the documentation is not correct. Shouldn't it say
something like that:
This recipe is considered [or examined] only if none of the previous
recipes up to the last one without an 'E' flag were executed.
and the second sentence would be useless.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
