Your message dated Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:38:35 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#380631: Fwd: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
The requirement for the X-PTS-Approved header is IMHO questionably,
but I guess that's the way it is.
Could you let messages to keywords straight through, though?
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: host master.debian.org[70.103.162.30]
said: 550 messages to the PTS require an X-PTS-Approved header (in reply to
end of DATA command)
It's not always possible to modify the scripts generating these
messages, and the addresses aren't publicly announced, so they're
unlikely to get spam.
Thanks,
--
martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
\____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:"; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
spamtraps: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
- friedrich nietzsche
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 04 Aug 2006, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > Could you let messages to keywords straight through, though?
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: host master.debian.org[70.103.162.30]
> > said: 550 messages to the PTS require an X-PTS-Approved header (in
> > reply to
> > end of DATA command)
> >
> > It's not always possible to modify the scripts generating these
> > messages, and the addresses aren't publicly announced, so they're
> > unlikely to get spam.
>
> This is how it used to work, there was a very recent (dunno when, owner@
> was not informed) addition to exim4.conf adding this header requirement
> for *everything* (including postmaster@, owner@, and our bounce-handler
> (which is therefore also broken)).
The configuration has been lifted for the bounce handler. The special
header is still required for any non d.o machine. But it's going to stay
that way, so there's no point in keeping that bug open. Closing it now.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
--- End Message ---
