On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 13:32 +1100, Ted Cooper wrote: > Brian Blood wrote: > > I understand how it works and what the documentation says.... > > > > I'm suggesting that use of the def: operation should be exempt from > > errors when strict_acl_vars is on as use of def: operation is merely a > > test of the variable's existence, not use of the variable defined or > > not. > > It's not a test of its existence. It replaces def:varname with either > the content of the variable, or an empty string when it's not defined. > It then becomes a true or false as empty string is considered to be false.
this is a bit inaccurate. def on a variable whose contents is "0" will still return a truth value. I don't see the harm in making the change Brian asks for -- it will certainly not break any existing configurations, since it is an error currently. create a ticket on bugs.exim.org ? -- regards, | Redpill _ Kjetil T. Homme | Linpro (_) -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
