* David T-G ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Jerome --
> 
> ...and then Jerome De Greef said...
> % 
> % I think I have the solution:
> 
> Yay!
> 
> 
> % 
> % send-hook '~t .*' 'my_hdr From: Jerome De Greef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>'
> % send-hook !'~t .*' 'my_hdr From: Jerome De Greef<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>'
> 
> Does this work, or do you think it should?  I'd expect that you'd need
> 
>   ..*
> 
> in your patterns instead of just 
> 
>   .*
> 
> 'cuz the former is "one character plus zero or more characters" while the
> latter still accepts none.
> 
> Perhaps it works simply because there is a To: header to check versus one
> being absent; in that case, you can probably leave off the asterisk.

It works as is. But you're right, I thought .* was doing what ..* does.
I'm not that good with regular expressions. BTW, doesn't ..* do the same
as .+ ?

Jerome

-- 
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
|               'the panorama of the city is wrong                  |
|               in fact the city seems to be gone!'                 |
|                 the clash, stop the world, 1980                   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+

Reply via email to