On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 08:51:26AM -0700, Brian W. Antoine wrote: > At 08:12 AM 9/3/2003, you wrote: > >On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 07:51:32AM -0700, Brian W. Antoine wrote: > >> would provide a way to fail more gracefully. Blocking all incoming > >mail might be > >> an option for an individual user, but an ISP would probably want an > >option to > >> simply let the mail flow unchecked while a warning was sent to > >somebody. Waking > >> up to discover that your mail servers have been offline all night and > >your users > >> are raising hell is not a good way to start a day. > >> > >> Of course the best option would be for the code not to fail in the > >first place, > >> but ... :) > > > >I'm using the clamav-milter, and when clamd dies, mail is not > >blocked: > > > >Sep 2 01:53:53 jane sm-mta[29805]: [ID 801593 mail.error] > >h825rrvg029805: Milter (clamav): local socket name > >/var/run/clmilter.sock unsafe > >Sep 2 01:53:53 jane sm-mta[29805]: [ID 801593 mail.info] > >h825rrvg029805: Milter (clamav): to error state > > *shrug* It blocks it under my sendmail install. If that's configurable, > I'd sure like to know how to do it.
This is how I had it defined in the sendmail config: Xclamav, S=local:/var/run/clmilter.sock, F=, T=S:4m;R:4m Clamd and clamav-milter just cored about 30 minutes ago, and mail continued to be accepted... -j ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Clamav-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clamav-users
