Matt Kettler wrote:
> Penghui Wang wrote:
>
>> Hello, list,
>>
>> I have tested three versions of SA. And found some special results.
>>
>> SA 3.0.5 (RPM from DAG)
>> SA 3.1.7 (Debian Apt & RPM from DAG)
>> SA 3.2.4 (RPM from DAG)
>>
>> In the default rule 20_head_test.cf
>>
>> There are several lines like the follow
>>
>> header __HAS_SUBJECT exists:Subject
>> meta MISSING_SUBJECT !__HAS_SUBJECT
>> describe MISSING_SUBJECT Missing Subject: header
>>
>> In the VERSION 3.0.5 and 3.2.4, i found whether or not the mail have a
>> "Subject" in the header part, the MISSING_SUBJECT rules has been hitted.
>> But in the last version 3.1.7, it works great.
>>
>> And the same condition with other similar rules, such as __HAS_REVD,
>> __HAS_RECEIVED etc..
>>
>> I have diged this for about one day. But there's no result. Does
>> anyone meet the same problem? Please drop me a message.\
>>

> It should work fine in any version that supports metas. (ie: anything
> newer than 2.5x)
>
> However, be aware it will only match a message with NO Subject: header.
> It will NOT fire off for a message with an empty subject. There must be
> no Subject: at all for the rule to work.
>
>
>
>
>

I have tested via the sendmail command:

#sendmail wangph < none-subject
#sendmail wangph < have-subject

#cat none-subject
This is the message body.

#cat have-subject
Subject: This is the message subject

This is the message body.

Both of them marked with MISSING_SUBJECT.

So, that's not the condition you have mentained. But thanks any way.

Best regards,

Penghui Wang.