On Wed, 15 Jul 2009, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
body =~ /(?!www\.[a-z]{2,3}[0-9]{2,3}\.(com|net|org))
This is invalid.
Please ignore. I use a generator....
To avoid red herrings, you should have mentioned it. ;)
What I 'shoulda dun' (sic) is type that first bit correctly... :-D
Yeah, well -- are they? Any chance there's a space injected at the
places that are now line breaks? Or possibly invisible chars anywhere?
Nope. The second rule is a cut-n-paste of the first with the look-ahead
removed via the delete key. All other characters should be the same....
Tested again, both of them do work for me...
Totally weird....
Well, HOW exactly do YOU test these?
The 'error' is a false negative, so I figure it is harmless to test
it in the 'live' mail stream, avoiding all possible introduced errors
from testing scripts/code.... Here is the spam hit results from
this actual e-mail of yours that I am answering:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2003.0 required=10.0 autolearn=disabled
tests=LOC_09061905=1,LOC_SAUSERS_RCVD_WL=-1000,
LOC_SAUSERS_TO_WL=-1000,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4
...well, yeah, I have a simple solution for the problem of spamsign
sometimes appearing in SA list mail..... :) But you can see how the '05'
rule (no look-ahead) is listed, but not the '01' rule. By all that I
understand, this just 'should not happen'...
I'm beginning to think maybe I've got an 'unlucky' combination of
Perl and SA versions....? My SA is reasonably new (3.25) but my Perl
is the default packaged with CentOS 4 (5.8.5).....
- C
