Martin Gregorie a écrit :
> On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 20:01 +0200, mouss wrote:
>> Why do you guys put a '.*' there? This would also match
>>
> Fair cop, guv, on both counts.
>
> I spotted that '[.*]' didn't do what the OP wanted and didn't look any
> further. Obviously,
> ^X-Spam-Status:[ \t]{1,40}(Yes|YES)
>
> is better than my original suggestion since it allows only whitespace
> between the header name and the Yes/No indication. I tested this one in
> grep with the -P flag on (use a Perl regex). It does what the OP
> wanted.
>
Is there a variant of SA that puts multiple spaces?
>> Note that it is easier to use X-Spam-Flag if it is available. otherwise,
>>
> I should have mentioned that, since I use it in a program that throws
> spam in the bit bucket. I forgot that X-Spam-Flag exists since it
> doesn't appear in messages SA thinks are non-spam, which is all that
> gets into my mailbox.
>
>>> X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.9 required=6.0
> This also shows that line wrapping in an incoming X-Spam-Status line may
> cause match failures unless you're sure that something has unpacked the
> entire header into a single string before you apply the regex to it.
>
Indeed. grep and variants aren't good at mail headers. Fortunately, OP
is using postfix header_checks, which work on "full" headers (folded).
note also that these checks are not case sensitive by default (the /i
modifier works the opposite way).
