On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 12:19:28PM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> Marc MERLIN wrote:
>
> MM> I wrote my sa-exim code with the understanding that all the X-Spam headers
> MM> were single line, with the exception of X-Spam-Report:
> MM> Is this correct and therefore do I have another bug in my code or is it an
> MM> incorrect expectation?
>
> I think it's an incorrect expectation. You should generally expect a valid
> RFC2822 header which might contain /\n\s+/ bits.
Ok, that will teach me for trying to take a shortcut and think that SA
headers will always look the same :-)
(thanks for confirming this though)
I guess I'll roll out an updated version of my patch to deal with this.
It's interesting that this only happened one to me with SA, even though I
receive 2-300 Emails a day...
Marc
--
Microsoft is to operating systems & security ....
.... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/ | Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP key
_______________________________________________________________
Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply
the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
