Daniel L. Miller:
> On 5/22/2012 6:24 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >> I tried 'sendmail -f exter...@externaldomain.com -bv
> >> myaddr...@mydomain.com'. This generates a mail delivery report to the
> >> address specified as the -f parameter - instead of the login name
> >> executing the sendmail com
Wietse Venema:
> Daniel L. Miller:
> > On 5/22/2012 5:04 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > sendmail -f sender (and yes, it does work correctly).
> > >
> > >> I've only tried the -bv option. Does my desired test require the -v and
> > >> actually deliver a message?
> > > They differ only in whether ma
Daniel L. Miller:
>
> The above is a very rough draft - but something like this that exposes
> Postfix's thinking,
Actually showing the message way through Postfix looks like a good idea.
Best regards,
MU
smime.p7s
Description: Kryptograficzna sygnatura S/MIME
On 5/22/2012 6:24 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
I tried 'sendmail -f exter...@externaldomain.com -bv
myaddr...@mydomain.com'. This generates a mail delivery report to the
address specified as the -f parameter - instead of the login name
executing the sendmail command. So unless I have control of tha
Daniel L. Miller:
> On 5/22/2012 5:04 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > sendmail -f sender (and yes, it does work correctly).
> >
> >> I've only tried the -bv option. Does my desired test require the -v and
> >> actually deliver a message?
> > They differ only in whether mail is delivered or not.
> >
>
On 5/22/2012 5:04 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
sendmail -f sender (and yes, it does work correctly).
I've only tried the -bv option. Does my desired test require the -v and
actually deliver a message?
They differ only in whether mail is delivered or not.
Both use 100% exactly the identical same
Daniel L. Miller:
> >> Is there a way of specifying the sender address as well? Trying
> >> 'sendmail -f externalu...@otherdomain.com -bv myu...@mydomain.com'
> >> didn't work out...
> > It works correctly. See the example at the end of
> > http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.html
> >
On 5/22/2012 4:08 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Daniel L. Miller:
On 5/22/2012 12:58 AM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
* Daniel L. Miller:
I would find it quite useful to have a command, whereby either a
designated sender or recipient address can be tested against the
complete Postfix configuration, a
Daniel L. Miller:
> On 5/22/2012 12:58 AM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> > * Daniel L. Miller:
> >> I would find it quite useful to have a command, whereby either a
> >> designated sender or recipient address can be tested against the
> >> complete Postfix configuration, and have both the process an
On 5/22/2012 12:58 AM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
* Daniel L. Miller:
I would find it quite useful to have a command, whereby either a
designated sender or recipient address can be tested against the
complete Postfix configuration, and have both the process and the
result displayed. For example
* Daniel L. Miller :
> I would find it quite useful to have a command, whereby either a
> designated sender or recipient address can be tested against the
> complete Postfix configuration, and have both the process and the
> result displayed. For example:
Have you tried "sendmail -bv ..."?
p@ric
I would find it quite useful to have a command, whereby either a
designated sender or recipient address can be tested against the
complete Postfix configuration, and have both the process and the result
displayed. For example:
postcanonical [-r | -s] tar...@domain.com
using recipient_canonica
12 matches
Mail list logo
