I'd like to double check something that I don't see explicitly in the
manual, though it seems to be implicit.
The only ACL's run for non-SMTP mail are acl_not_smtp and, if available,
acl_not_smtp_mime, right?
I think acl_not_smtp_mime needs to be listed in "Specifying when ACLs
are used", section 39.2 of the 4.6 spec. And maybe an explicit answer
to my question, if it's not there already. (The lack of the mime acl
was actually what started me thinking maybe other acls ran under
non-smtp conditions. )
Also, while I'm double-checking the obvious, if fetchmail delivers mail
to exim via 127.0.0.1, that *is* an smtp delivery, right? And hosts =
127.0.0.1 will match it?
in A.4.4
seems to indicate that hosts = : is the matching condition for "local
SMTP (i.e., not over TCP/IP)". Is that a reference to using Unix
sockets instead?

Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Ross Boylan wrote:

I'd like to double check something that I don't see explicitly in the
manual, though it seems to be implicit.
The only ACL's run for non-SMTP mail are acl_not_smtp and, if available,
acl_not_smtp_mime, right?

Yes (though in the next version of Exim there will also be
acl_not_smtp_start).

I think acl_not_smtp_mime needs to be listed in "Specifying when ACLs
are used", section 39.2 of the 4.6 spec.

Thanks for the suggestion.

Also, while I'm double-checking the obvious, if fetchmail delivers mail
to exim via 127.0.0.1, that *is* an smtp delivery, right? And hosts =
127.0.0.1 will match it?

Yes.

in A.4.4
seems to indicate that hosts = : is the matching condition for "local
SMTP (i.e., not over TCP/IP)". Is that a reference to using Unix
sockets instead?

No, it's the -bs option. (Exim doesn't have support for accepting email
via a Unix domain socket.)

Tony.

Mon, 2006-07-03 at 19:12 +0100, Tony Finch wrote:

Yes (though in the next version of Exim there will also be
acl_not_smtp_start).

great :) It would've been nice though if someone was acking patches
or noting that they'd been (rewritten and) applied, I was still under
the impression that I had to follow up on that patch.

Hm, come to think of it, that's what I expect from the Linux kernel
community. Am I supposed to follow something else for exim to see this
for myself?

johannes

Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Tony Finch wrote:

Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Ross Boylan wrote:

I think acl_not_smtp_mime needs to be listed in "Specifying when ACLs
are used", section 39.2 of the 4.6 spec.

Thanks for the suggestion.

I had already noted this for updating in the next edition (for the 4.63
release), but Tony has got there first. Thanks, Tony!

Tue, 2006-07-04 at 10:08 +0100, Philip Hazel wrote:
Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Johannes Berg wrote:

great :) It would've been nice though if someone was acking patches
or noting that they'd been (rewritten and) applied, I was still under
the impression that I had to follow up on that patch.

Subscribe to exim-cvs (AT) exim (DOT) org.

That works, good point.

johannes

Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Johannes Berg wrote:

great :) It would've been nice though if someone was acking patches
or noting that they'd been (rewritten and) applied, I was still under
the impression that I had to follow up on that patch.

Subscribe to exim-cvs (AT) exim (DOT) org.