> It's called a "pipe", and it happens quite often, in a UNIX environment.
> The first situation that comes to mind is a sophisticated grep that simply
> won't cut it by running it once. As a rough example, consider grepping for
> E-mail messages that pass through a badly misconfigured Sendmail 8.6 relay,
> unless the header includes something that looks like an IP address:
> grep 'SMI-8.6' * | egrep -v '[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+'
I would argue that the rblsmtpd calling itself is not a pipe.
execvp(*argv,argv);
doesn't look like a pipe to me. Gee, if the manual page
said that I had to use rblsmtpd with multiple *pipes*
to access different -r lookup sites, I'd be happy as well!
I'm sorry, but just listing all the options doesn't cut it when
the usage is non-standard, non-intuitive and downright difficult
to come to without a reference.
Look, I'm not the first to point this out and I won't be
the last asking this. One poster said I'm just part of the
problem unless I'm part of the solution. I can't modify your
source, but I'm glad to say that I *am* working on a web page
to reference all this.
> Not a perfect algorythm, but will do the job fine, in 99% of the cases, and
> it makes no sense to waste a few hours to get it 100% right, if it's just a
> one-time deal.
Ya know.... I just got back from a new consulting job. This place paid
someone several hundred dollars to install qmail and the person never
did get it working -- after several WEEKs of work. I'm sure you'll be
delighted to know that I have the job now.
> > er, close. It wasn't the fact that I didn't know it could do that -- I
> > didn't realize that was how it was supposed to be done! I'm not going to
> > argue over multiple -rs or multiple instances now that I know it's
> > supposed to be multiple instances. I'll just wait for the next poor sap
> > that runs across this and I'll post ``I told you sos'' ...
>
> Actually, since whenever rblsmtpd was released, you're the first person to
> get confused by it to such a degree as to initiate a long-running rant on
> the subject. A few others asked how it can be done, and were more than
> happy with the answer, which is no different than what happens with any
> issue regarding any program.
Huh? The answer given to me was RTFM! I read the FM. I was *still*
confused. Actually, one person from this liste send me a message
in a PRIVATE message with all that I needed to go. Those that posted
to the list just insisted that the documentation was sufficient
and told me to RTFM.
> > Right... but procmail gets bad-mouthed. maildrop is the prescribed
> > medicine... but we all know that one doesn't need c++ to get qmail-uce
> > going. nope.
> Correct. As long as you comply with the interface, you can plug in a
> filtering engine written in Perl, for all I care.
Now that's definitely an idea right there.
Scott
