On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Dave Evans wrote: > The documentation for the ACL "decode" feature looks like it could do with > improving. In places, it is listed as a modifier; in other places, it is > listed as a condition (but nowhere, AFAICT, does it state what that condition > actually returns).
You are right. I thought of it as a modifier, but I've just looked at Tom's code, and it seems that if there is a decoding failure, it might act like a condition. Are you there, Tom? What was your intention for the behaviour of "decode"? > From a quick glance at the source, it looks like it's actually a condition, > and it fails if decoding is explicitly disabled (e.g. the RHS expands to "0"); > defers if, say, the disk filled up; or succeeds if decoding was requested, and > was successful. Does that sound about right? My reading of the documentation made me believe otherwise, but looking at the code, I agree with you. I'll wait for Tom's comments, and fix the doc for the next release. -- Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service Get the Exim 4 book: http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
