On Thu, 31 May 2007, David S. Madole wrote: > Does anyone know why filter user variables ($n0-$n9) are not allowed > to be expanded outside of filters to give the last value set to them > in a filter?
Yes. If a message has more than one recipient, and each recipient runs a filter that sets $n0, what value would you like? OK, I can see that it might make sense for the rest of one recipient's routing, but there is no mechanism for implementing that. > I have a system-wide per-user filter run from a router that I would > like in some way to return a value to the main configuration file. I > am trying to add headers on a per-user basis based on a filter script. > If I could set $n7 and then expand that later in a "headers_add" in a > transport it seems like that would do the trick. There is also no mechanism for remembering per-user values of variables from routing so that they can be used in a transport. > Is there any reasonable way to pass a value back from a filter that > can be detected in a transport? I don't know if it's reasonable, but the only way I can think of would be to redirect to some fake address with a suitable suffix/prefix that can be detected and removed in a transport. -- Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service Get the Exim 4 book: http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
