Re: [exim] ${address: foo(comment)@bar.org}

2019-02-18 Thread Jeremy Harris via Exim-users
On 18/02/2019 05:13, Jasen Betts via Exim-users wrote: > I have submitted a patch: Thanks. > I'm not sure if I should be free()ing "t" in that code - the old code > wasn't. I guess exim will clean that up automatically. It's correct to not do so. -- Cheers, Jeremy -- ## List details at

Re: [exim] ${address: foo(comment)@bar.org}

2019-02-17 Thread Jasen Betts via Exim-users
On 2019-02-15, Jasen Betts via Exim-users wrote: > On 2019-02-14, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users wrote: >> Summary: >> >> On 13/02/2019 05:41, Jasen Betts via Exim-users wrote: >>> Should it be doing that? >> They should be stripped. >> >>> (I could write a patch if this is a bug) >> >> That

Re: [exim] ${address: foo(comment)@bar.org}

2019-02-15 Thread Jasen Betts via Exim-users
On 2019-02-14, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users wrote: > Summary: > > On 13/02/2019 05:41, Jasen Betts via Exim-users wrote: >> Should it be doing that? > They should be stripped. > >> (I could write a patch if this is a bug) > > That would be very useful. I'll also have a look at the code behind

Re: [exim] ${address: foo(comment)@bar.org}

2019-02-14 Thread Jeremy Harris via Exim-users
Summary: On 13/02/2019 05:41, Jasen Betts via Exim-users wrote: > Should it be doing that? They should be stripped. > (I could write a patch if this is a bug) That would be very useful. > Is there some other method for that? Ugly, but... you could take them out with ${sg }. It's probably

Re: [exim] ${address: foo(comment)@bar.org}

2019-02-13 Thread Mike Brudenell via Exim-users
> > But you're not dealing with a From: header. You're only doing > a ${address:foo} expansion with a literal string for foo, > in this test. And "foo" gets string-processed, which means > backslash-interpretation for escaping. > Doh! I've got it now. So if it had instead been

Re: [exim] ${address: foo(comment)@bar.org}

2019-02-13 Thread Jeremy Harris via Exim-users
On 13/02/2019 12:39, Mike Brudenell via Exim-users wrote: >>> exim -v -be '${address:Pete(A nice \) chap) }' >>> gives the empty string, suggesting Exim thinks it's a parse error >> >> You'd be needing to double the backslash, for the string-parsing >> stage of the 822 address there, to actually

Re: [exim] ${address: foo(comment)@bar.org}

2019-02-13 Thread Mike Brudenell via Exim-users
On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 at 12:10, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users < exim-users@exim.org> wrote: > On 13/02/2019 11:07, Mike Brudenell via Exim-users wrote: > > > exim -v -be '${address:Pete(A nice \) chap) }' > > gives the empty string, suggesting Exim thinks it's a parse error > > You'd be needing to

Re: [exim] ${address: foo(comment)@bar.org}

2019-02-13 Thread Jeremy Harris via Exim-users
On 13/02/2019 11:07, Mike Brudenell via Exim-users wrote: > Hmm… There does seem to be an oddity. Agreed. > Jasen gave a link to an "extreme > example" included in the RFC: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#appendix-A.5 > > > Trying this in various forms using Exim 4.90.1 on Ubuntu

Re: [exim] ${address: foo(comment)@bar.org}

2019-02-13 Thread Mike Brudenell via Exim-users
Hmm… There does seem to be an oddity. Jasen gave a link to an "extreme example" included in the RFC: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#appendix-A.5 Trying this in various forms using Exim 4.90.1 on Ubuntu shows up some interesting things: exim -v -be '${address:Pete(A nice chap) }' gives

Re: [exim] ${address: foo(comment)@bar.org}

2019-02-13 Thread Jeremy Harris via Exim-users
On 13/02/2019 05:41, Jasen Betts via Exim-users wrote: > the string expansion operator ${address: > > doesn't seem to strip RFC5322 comments (described in section 3.2.2) > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.2.2 > > An extreme example: > >

[exim] ${address: foo(comment)@bar.org}

2019-02-12 Thread Jasen Betts via Exim-users
the string expansion operator ${address: doesn't seem to strip RFC5322 comments (described in section 3.2.2) https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.2.2 An extreme example: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#appendix-A.5 Should it be doing that? (I could write a patch if this