[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2
From: |
Bob Carragher |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2 |
Date: |
Mon, 09 Mar 2015 21:18:26 -0700 |
Thanks for the proposed localpostproc, Ken!
Unfortunately, I don't think I can use it, due to a lack of a
looping mechanism -- or, at least, a "there-exists" mechanism.
I need something that checks the recipients' host(s), which
means potentially checking more than 1 string. The pseudo-code
would be roughly
if @.*stanford.edu in {%(host{to}), %(host{cc}), %(host{bcc})}
postflags=""
else
postflags="-server smtp.gmail.com -port submission -tls -sasl -user
dnc2dnc"
I could break up the if-clause into 3 scan(1) invocations, but
things break down when there's more than 1 address in a given
component since, quoting from the mh-format(5) page:
The return value of functions noted with `*' is computed
from the first address present in the header component.
[...]
host addr string the host domain*
Am I missing an obvious solution?
Thanks!
Bob
On Wed, 04 Mar 2015 12:25:41 -0500 Ken Hornstein <address@hidden> sez:
> So after testing it for a day, I found a problem.
> Specifically, if you're using annotations on replies my simple
> script broke. The reason is that the arguments ended up being:
>
> [...] draft filename -idanno N
>
> Where "N" was the file descriptor to write the annotation to;
> my previous iteration assumed the last argument to post was the
> filename.
>
> I ended up having to do this code (complete script appended at
> the end):
>
> find_draftmessage() {
> skip_next=0
>
> for arg; do
> case "$arg" in
> -al* | -filt* | -wi* | -client | -idanno | -server | \
> -partno | -saslmaxssf | -saslmech | -user | -por* | \
> -file* | -mhl* | -mt* | -cr* | -lib* | -oauth)
> skip_next=1
> ;;
> -*) skip_next=0;
> ;;
> *)
> if [ "$skip_next" -eq 0 ]; then
> draftmessage="$arg"
> return 0
> fi
> skip_next=0
> ;;
> esac
> done
>
> echo "Cannot find draft message name in argument list"
> exit 1
> }
>
> I am just wondering out loud if there is a better way than
> putting knowledge in the script of whether a particular switch
> takes an argument. It just seems brittle to me. Ideas? Other
> approaches?
>
> --Ken
>
>
>
>
>
> #!/bin/sh
> #
> # localpostproc - decide where to send email based on the draft message
> #
>
> #
> # Find out which message is the draft message; yes, this sucks
> #
>
> find_draftmessage() {
> skip_next=0
>
> for arg; do
> case "$arg" in
> -al* | -filt* | -wi* | -client | -idanno | -server | \
> -partno | -saslmaxssf | -saslmech | -user | -por* | \
> -file* | -mhl* | -mt* | -cr* | -lib* | -oauth)
> skip_next=1
> ;;
> -*) skip_next=0;
> ;;
> *)
> if [ "$skip_next" -eq 0 ]; then
> draftmessage="$arg"
> return 0
> fi
> skip_next=0
> ;;
> esac
> done
>
> echo "Cannot find draft message name in argument list"
> exit 1
> }
>
> realpost="$(mhparam libdir)/post"
>
> if [ $# -eq 0 ]; then
> echo "Usage: [post switches] filename"
> exit 1
> fi
>
> find_draftmessage "$@"
>
> fromhost=$(scan -format '%(host{from})' -file "$draftmessage")
>
> if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
> echo "Unable to run scan on draft file $draftmessage, aborting"
> exit 1
> fi
>
> if [ -z "$fromhost" ]; then
> echo "Could not determine hostname of From: address"
> exit 1;
> fi
>
> case "$fromhost" in
> *.some.other.host)
> postflags="-server some.other.server -sasl -port submission"
> ;;
>
> pobox.com)
> postflags="-server smtp.pobox.com -sasl -tls -port submission"
> ;;
>
> *)
> echo "Don't know how to send email from $fromhost"
> exit 1
> ;;
> esac
>
> exec "$realpost" $postflags "$@"
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, (continued)
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ralph Corderoy, 2015/03/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ken Hornstein, 2015/03/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ralph Corderoy, 2015/03/06
- Message not available
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ken Hornstein, 2015/03/10
- Message not available
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/10
- Message not available
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/10
Message not available
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2,
Bob Carragher <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ken Hornstein, 2015/03/10
- Message not available
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ralph Corderoy, 2015/03/11
- Message not available
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/11
Message not availableRe: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/11
Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ralph Corderoy, 2015/03/11
Message not availableRe: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/11
Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ken Hornstein, 2015/03/11
Message not availableRe: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Bob Carragher, 2015/03/11
Re: [Nmh-workers] Multi-homed postproc, v2, Ralph Corderoy, 2015/03/12