On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 03:16:04PM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users
wrote:
> What's notable here, is how rare actual compatibility breaks are in
> Postfix. Wietse has managed to maintain essentially backwards
> compatible behaviour for over 20 years, which speaks to both design
> qualit
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 01:56:40PM -0500, sandm...@rice.edu wrote:
> > So the cases that use ${recipient_delimiter} will only match addresss that
> > actually have an extension. If you want to use it unconditionally, you'll
> > need to use a literal "+", instead.
>
> Wow! There is no need for
> So the cases that use ${recipient_delimiter} will only match addresss that
> actually have an extension. If you want to use it unconditionally, you'll
> need to use a literal "+", instead.
Wow! There is no need for me to use the literal. Thank you so much for such a
quick solution!
rt2
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 12:38:22PM -0500, sandmant--- via Postfix-users wrote:
> I am updating a system from postfix-2.10.1 to postfix-3.5.9 (and
> RHEL7->RHEL9), and it seems my forward_path is no longer getting
> processed correctly.
The Postfix local delivery agent is extremently stable well-t
