From guenther@aragorn.it.gac.edu Fri Dec 10 09:40:06 1999 Path: uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!feeder.qis.net!hermes.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!news.minn.net!news.winternet.com!news1.mr.net!news.gac.edu!not-for-mail From: Philip Guenther Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: procmail, trivial html detection, and a quirk Date: 09 Dec 1999 23:06:41 -0600 Organization: Gustavus Adolphus College Lines: 38 Message-ID: References: <82q0vq$4ot@loisto.uwasa.fi> NNTP-Posting-Host: aragorn.it.gac.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: callisto.gac.edu 944802367 27354 138.236.68.41 (10 Dec 1999 05:06:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@callisto.gac.edu NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Dec 1999 05:06:07 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.3 Xref: uni-berlin.de comp.mail.misc:50945 ts@UWasa.Fi (Timo Salmi) writes: > I just noted that, at least in procmail v3.13.1 1999/04/05 > > :0B: > * > * > > does not work. Instead one has to apply > > :0B: > * [<]/body> > * [<]/html> Yep. A leading '<' or '>' on a condition causes procmail to interpret the condition as a size test. If you want a normal regexp condition that starts by matching a literal '<' or '>' character you have to protect the leading character from such interpretation. There are several ways of doing so. The most efficient are to use parens or a backslash: * () or * (<)/body> or * () or * \ That last one is generally avoided because it looks like you're using the \< regexp special when you really aren't. Putting the '<' or '>' in brackets also works, as you did above, but it slows down the matching ever so slightly as a character class is slower to match than a single normal character. Thus, one of the above four methods is usually prefered. Philip Guenther