I agree, this is not a SA issue. I confirmed it to myself yesterday when
I splited my original code in four small pieces. The only other thing I
should be investigating in more detail is the
hint posted by jdow
FROM_DAEMON is a keyword in procmail - from man procmailrc:
If the regular expression contains â^FROM_DAEMONâ it will be
substitut-
ed by â(^(Mailing-List:|Precedence:.*(junk|bulk|list)|To: Multiple
recipients of |(((Resent-)?(From|Sender)|X-Envelope-From):|>?From
)([^>]*[^([EMAIL PROTECTED])?(Post(ma?(st(e?r)?|n)|office)|(send)?Mail(er)?
|daemon|m(mdf|ajordomo)|n?uucp|LIST(SERV|proc)|NETSERV|o(wner|ps)
|r(e(quest|sponse)|oot)|b(ounce|bs\.smtp)|echo|mirror|s(erv(ices?|er)
|mtp(error)?|ystem)|A(dmin(istrator)?|MMGR|utoanswer))(([^).!:a-
z0-9][-_a-z0-9]*)?[%@>\t ][^<)]*(\(.*\).*)?)?$([^>]|$)))â, which
should
catch mails coming from most daemons (howâs that for a regular
expression
Though I already have gone through that, but will go over it once more
before I send it to procmailrc mailing list.
Thank you all for you response. I guess we can close this thread here as
my problem does not belong to SA.
-Jai
guenther wrote:
Please resist the pressing urge to top-post.
On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 12:43 -0700, Jai Rangi wrote:
I can understand your frustration. Did I take you suggestion? yes and
no.
1. Made changes in one test account and did not implement on others.
Waiting for the problem to be resolved completely before I made this
changes in every users procmailrc file.
Ah, nice to see you didn't completely ignore the feedback. So, you do
have at least two different rc files you are working on -- one with the
fixed rules, and this extended one...
2. Seriously (and truly) did not believe that this can be part of my
problem and I am sure this is not.
It may be related. These rules potentially can have side-effects and
trigger on mail you didn't intend it to.
Also, most issues I pointed out make it harder to understand the
receipts. For you, while debugging and trying to understand what
possibly could have went wrong. And for us, having a brief look at it
trying to spot issues.
Did you investigate with the notes in mind I pointed out in my first
post? (Hint, since this seems to be a procmail receipt issue, not a SA
issue: Before asking procmail folks for help, you'd better fix all
receipts. They might jump on these, otherwise...)
guenther
