From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/23604 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: amu@MIT.EDU (Aaron M. Ucko) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: `nnmail-split-fancy' regexp Date: 28 Jun 1999 14:14:12 -0400 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035161306 2911 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 00:48:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 00:48:26 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from farabi.math.uh.edu (farabi.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.57]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA15039 for ; Mon, 28 Jun 1999 14:18:57 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by farabi.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAB25370; Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:14:38 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:15:28 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA19785 for ; Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:15:18 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from MIT.EDU (SOUTH-STATION-ANNEX.MIT.EDU [18.72.1.2]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA14900 for ; Mon, 28 Jun 1999 14:14:18 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from TUX.MIT.EDU by MIT.EDU with SMTP id AA23606; Mon, 28 Jun 99 14:13:35 EDT Original-Received: by tux.mit.edu (8.8.7/4.7) id OAA00399; Mon, 28 Jun 1999 14:14:13 -0400 Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen's message of "28 Jun 1999 13:38:47 -0400" Original-Lines: 17 User-Agent: Gnus/5.070088 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.88) Emacs/20.3 Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:23604 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:23604 Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen writes: > Per Abrahamsen writes: > > > How about using ".*" as the magic prefix instead? > > Sounds like a good idea. Uhm, no. As Alexandre Oliva observed a couple of days ago in , the current syntax isn't powerful enough to determine whether a header includes bar@baz, foo-bar@baz, both, or neither. As it stands, mail sent only to foo-bar@baz gets treated as if it were also sent to bar@baz because `-' is classified as a word separator. -- Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (finger amu@monk.mit.edu)