http://www.exim.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=393
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-21 14:57 ------- (In reply to comment #2) > The existing code related to errors_copy (at least moan_check_errorcopy()) > should almost certainly be generalized instead. Perhaps a boolean option to > decide whether errors_copy should be applied to warning messages as well will > be sufficient, even? Yes, it looks more gracefull. But there is one moment: bounce recipient is either $sender_address or address from router's "errors_to" (deliver.c:6149). But warning recipient list has more complex derivation, and this aspect is not enough clean for me. I've used $sender_address for matching check in my patch, but is it correct in all possible situations? May be we should try to match pattern with every addres from warnmsg_recipients and join results by "or" or "and"? > But passing errors_copy and warnings_copy, respectively, > to moan_check_errorcopy() should be as easy. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
