Paul B. Henson:
> On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 05:41:55PM -0700, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Well no-one told me it happens with "sendmail -t", so I did not
> > test for that option (or the bazillion other permutations of Postfix
> > options). Let this be a reminder that a problem report should
> > con
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 05:41:55PM -0700, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Well no-one told me it happens with "sendmail -t", so I did not
> test for that option (or the bazillion other permutations of Postfix
> options). Let this be a reminder that a problem report should
> contain all the information tha
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 03:41:06PM -0700, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> The major change in 2.7 is below. The problem is that when sendmail(1)
> extracts recipients from the headers, and the message is too large,
> postdrop(1) will never see the extracted recipients.
Ah, Wietse tested with a recipie
Victor Duchovni:
> On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 12:55:21PM -0700, Paul B. Henson wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >
> > > Postfix hasn't changed, as far as I can tell. Perhaps something on
> > > your system has changed.
> >
> > We did update a number of c
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 12:55:21PM -0700, Paul B. Henson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Postfix hasn't changed, as far as I can tell. Perhaps something on
> > your system has changed.
>
> We did update a number of components, and after viewing post
On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Postfix hasn't changed, as far as I can tell. Perhaps something on
> your system has changed.
We did update a number of components, and after viewing postfix
changelogs and source code without anything popping out, we went back to
Paul B. Henson:
> We recently upgraded some systems from postfix 2.6.6 to postfix 2.7.4,
> and the behavior when trying to submit messages through the sendmail
> interface seems to have changed.
>
> In the previous version, if a message exceeded the configured
> message_size_limit, it would look l
