On Tue, 2008-12-02 at 20:09 -0500, Raymond Jette wrote:
> I am using:
> /bPO(?:\b ?#?|\d)/i
I asked you more than once, if you --lint check your configuration. This
answers it. You do NOT.
> My rules is not listed.
Yes.
> > > You don't need to escape the hash in a Perl RE unless you are using
> > > hash characters for the RE boundary markers.
> >
> > You're right. :) My bad. You need to escape the hash for SA, though.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> I wasn't aware of that. I guess I've never tried matching a hash with a
> SpamAssassin rule.
>
> In that case, my suggested rule becomes:
> Subject =~ /\bPO ?\#? ?\d/i
^^
# spamassassin --lint
[10186] warn: config: invalid regexp for rule MESTEK: /bPO(?:\b ?: missing or
invalid delimiters
[10186] warn: lint: 1 issues detected, please rerun with debug enabled for more
information
# grep MESTEK bad-config.cf
header MESTEK Subject =~ /bPO(?:\b ?#?|\d)/i
We've covered that before. You even included the reason in your very
reply.
You don't get back to questions. Do you seriously expect us to help you,
if you don't provide *any* detail whatsoever or answer our questions?
You reported a rule to work before. Now you changed it, and broke it. If
you keep stabbing at it and randomly changing rules... Good luck.
Oh, and again -- first thing *I* would do is to check where the
"missing" mail went. Hint: SA does not drop mail.
--
char *t="[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
