Hello Miguel,
On Sunday, March 9, 2003 at 11:31 GMT +0100, an infinite number of
monkeys posting as Miguel A. Urech [MAU] typed:
Sorry I somehow missed your reply.
>> 1. Change the reply template so you remove the % symbol from in front
>> of the %COMMENT macros and the %QINCLUDE macros.
>> - This will show us what exactly is being sent to print_recipient
MAU> To: COMMENT="[EMAIL PROTECTED]; "QINCLUDE="print_recipient"
MAU> To: COMMENT=""Miguel A. Urech" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "QINCLUDE="print_recipient"
Ok, so this makes me confident that the problem is not in your main
template.
>> 2. Reverse the change above and change the last line in the
>> print_recipient template from %COMMENT="" to %COMMENT
>> - This will let us see how far the print_recipient2 template got
>> before failing.
MAU> To:
MAU> To:
This one is less clear. I don't really understand why it should be
blank. Can you please try the following two modifications (one at a
time would be good) to your print_recipient template:
,----- [ My print_recipient ]
| %COMMENT="9
| %COMMENT"%-
| %COMMENT
| %SETPATTREGEXP="(?s-m)^\s{9}(.*)\n$"%-
| %REGEXPMATCH="%QINCLUDE='print_recipient2'"%-
| %COMMENT=""%-
`-----
,----- [ My print_recipient ]
| %COMMENT="9
| %COMMENT"%-
| SETPATTREGEXP="(?s-m)^\s{9}(.*)\n$"%-
| REGEXPMATCH="%QINCLUDE='print_recipient2'"%-
| %COMMENT=""%-
`-----
>> 3. Reverse the change above and *add* a line to the beginning of the
>> print_recipient2 template. Put the macro %COMMENT="" as the very
>> first line of print_recipient2.
>> - This will tell us if print_recipient2 is being called, and what
>> text is being sent to be processed.
MAU> To:
MAU> To:
This is just mystifying, however, in light of Nick's problem &
solution, I don't know what to think.
>> 4. Reverse the change above and change print_recipient2 to the
>> following.
>> - This template is slightly modified to ignore some more
>> white space. The modification shouldn't hurt the performance
>> of the template in normal cases.
MAU> To:
MAU> To:
Hmm, and you said that this is the same output as when you run the
version in <mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... The plot
thickens.
Sorry I'm making you do all these changes, but I can't replicate the
problem over here to test my brainstorming ideas.
One thing we should consider: if this is only happening on two
specific messages, _but_NO_others_, we may be beating a dead horse here.
It would be nice to understand why the templates failed, but we should
think about how much time is being spent versus how widespread the
problem is.
--
Thanks for writing,
Januk Aggarwal
________________________________________________________
Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBTECH" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
