"unmatched" test in nested rules does not behave as documented

[Steve Dodd]

I have been trying to use the "unmatched" test in a nested rule as follows:

action "digest" {
        add-to-cache $digdb key "%1"
        action "inbox"
}

match "^List-.*wbf3digest" in headers and "^Message-ID:.*<(.*)>" in headers {
        match not in-cache $digdb key "%1" action "digest"
        match unmatched action drop
}

(The idea being to deliver only the first copy of a message from a particular list to the inbox.)

The man page says:

"The inner rules will not be evaluated unless the outer one matches. Rules may be multiply nested. Note that the outer rule does not count as a match for the purposes of the matched and unmatched conditions."

However, looking at the source in mail-state.c:

...
        /* If the result was false, skip to find the next rule. */
        if (!mctx->result)
                goto next_rule;
        mctx->matched = 1;
        log_debug2("%s: matched to rule %u", a->name, mctx->rule->idx);

        /*
         * If this rule is stop, mark the context so when we get back after
         * delivery we know to stop.
         */
        if (mctx->rule->stop)
                mctx->done = 1;

        /* Handle nested rules. */
        if (!TAILQ_EMPTY(&mctx->rule->rules)) {
                log_debug2("%s: entering nested rules", a->name);
...

The "mctx->matched=1" line marks the message as matched when the outer rule matches, and it is not obviously cleared anywhere, contradicting the documentation..

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: fdm 1.6-2
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-45.99-generic 2.6.32.60+drm33.26
Uname: Linux 2.6.32-45-generic i686
Architecture: i386
Date: Tue Nov 20 11:01:28 2012
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 10.04 LTS "Lucid Lynx" - Release i386 (20100427.1)
ProcEnviron:
 PATH=(custom, user)
 LANG=en_GB.utf8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
SourcePackage: fdm

[Steve Dodd (anarchetic)]

Reported to upstream:

https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3588717&group_id=174568&atid=869744

[dino99 (9d9)]

That version is no more supported; and backport is not expected as its not a 'security' problem