Re: lmtpd segfaults after update to 2.4.19, seems it wants to act as proxy

2017-05-24 Thread Simon Matter
> On Wed, May 24, 2017, at 04:17 PM, Don Lewis wrote: >> This first version of the patch worked for me. A problem with >> >> the second version of the patch is that mlookup() gets called in >> >> a bunch of different places and the server variable would need >> >> to be initialized in all of them.

Re: lmtpd segfaults after update to 2.4.19, seems it wants to act as proxy

2017-05-24 Thread ellie timoney
On Wed, May 24, 2017, at 05:57 PM, Don Lewis wrote: > On 24 May, ellie timoney wrote: > > On Wed, May 24, 2017, at 04:17 PM, Don Lewis wrote: > >> This first version of the patch worked for me. A problem with > >> > >> the second version of the patch is that mlookup() gets called in > >> > >>

Re: lmtpd segfaults after update to 2.4.19, seems it wants to act as proxy

2017-05-24 Thread ellie timoney
On Wed, May 24, 2017, at 04:17 PM, Don Lewis wrote: > This first version of the patch worked for me. A problem with > > the second version of the patch is that mlookup() gets called in > > a bunch of different places and the server variable would need > > to be initialized in all of them. In v

Re: lmtpd segfaults after update to 2.4.19, seems it wants to act as proxy

2017-05-23 Thread ellie timoney
On Mon, May 22, 2017, at 03:55 PM, Simon Matter wrote: > Hi Ellie, > > Thanks for looking into it. > > Unfortunately with your new version of the patch I only get this: > > lmtpunix[23046]: FATAL: Internal error: assertion failed: append.c: 368: > stage != NULL && stage->parts[0] != '\0' > > Re

Re: lmtpd segfaults after update to 2.4.19, seems it wants to act as proxy

2017-05-21 Thread Simon Matter
> On Sat, May 20, 2017, at 05:59 PM, Simon Matter wrote: >> > This is the point where the wrong path is taken. >> > >> > >> > r = mlookup(namebuf, &server, NULL, NULL); >> > if (!r && server) { >> > /* remote mailbox */ >> > proxy_adddest(&dlist, rcpt, n, server, authuser); >> > stat

Re: lmtpd segfaults after update to 2.4.19, seems it wants to act as proxy

2017-05-21 Thread ellie timoney
On Sat, May 20, 2017, at 05:59 PM, Simon Matter wrote: > > This is the point where the wrong path is taken. > > > > > > r = mlookup(namebuf, &server, NULL, NULL); > > if (!r && server) { > > /* remote mailbox */ > > proxy_adddest(&dlist, rcpt, n, server, authuser); > > status[n] = no

Re: lmtpd segfaults after update to 2.4.19, seems it wants to act as proxy

2017-05-20 Thread Simon Matter
> > Quoting Simon Matter : > >> Hi, >> >> I'm resending this with new subject and one again attached the straces >> of >> a delivery with 2.4.18 and 2.4.19. >> > I've just updated our cyrus-imapd rpms from 2.4.18 -> 2.4.19. All >> seems well with just some small changes to the build. >

Re: lmtpd segfaults after update to 2.4.19, seems it wants to act as proxy

2017-05-19 Thread Sebastian Hagedorn
I guess creating a ticket on Github is the best way to get the developers' attention: Any help would be much appreaciated! -- Sebastian Hagedorn - Weyertal 121, Zimmer 2.02 Regionales Rechenzentrum (RRZK) Universität zu Köln / Cologne Unive

Re: lmtpd segfaults after update to 2.4.19, seems it wants to act as proxy

2017-05-19 Thread Michael Menge
Quoting Simon Matter : Hi, I'm resending this with new subject and one again attached the straces of a delivery with 2.4.18 and 2.4.19. I've just updated our cyrus-imapd rpms from 2.4.18 -> 2.4.19. All seems well with just some small changes to the build. However, I just can't get it to w

lmtpd segfaults after update to 2.4.19, seems it wants to act as proxy

2017-05-18 Thread Simon Matter
Hi, I'm resending this with new subject and one again attached the straces of a delivery with 2.4.18 and 2.4.19. >>> I've just updated our cyrus-imapd rpms from 2.4.18 -> 2.4.19. All seems well with just some small changes to the build. >>> >>> However, I just can't get it to work: lmtpd segfault