LuKreme:
What can I look at to figure out what the build options were for the
currently installed version so I can try to match them as closely on
the new compile?
search a file makedefs.out for current buildoptions
information about building: http://www.postfix.org/INSTALL.html
for postf
Hello!
Is there ever going to be a recipient(s) attribute from postfix to
policy daemon?
"The "recipient" attribute is available in the "RCPT TO" stage. It is
also available in the "DATA" and "END-OF-MESSAGE" stages if Postfix
accepted only one recipient for the current message."
Or might I requ
"The "recipient" attribute is available in the "RCPT TO" stage. It is
also available in the "DATA" and "END-OF-MESSAGE" stages if Postfix
accepted only one recipient for the current message."
You can use the instance attribute to collect the list of recipients at
RCPT TO stage. That informati
Patrik B?t:
> I'm writing a incoming policy daemon and want to look where the mail
> ends up, if there is more then 1 recipient I'm out to just see
> rcpt_count, that will not state the destinations.
Invoke the policy service in smtpd_recipient_restrictions, so that
it will be invoked once per rec
Or what the limitations are.
Note that you can not return different results for different
recipients at data or end_of_data stage. You can only pass or reject
the whole mail at all.
p.s. the policy server example included in the postfix docs would break.
substr(0,512) is to small for a
I have set up postfix to receive email from one of my domain, roadpost.org
I have set up two mailboxes - supp...@roadpost.org and suppo...@roadpost.org
When I send email to the support2 account, postfix delivers the mail to a
local mailbox as is expected.
When I send email to the support account
Jan P. Kessler:
>
> >> Or what the limitations are.
> >
> > Note that you can not return different results for different
> > recipients at data or end_of_data stage. You can only pass or reject
> > the whole mail at all.
> >
>
> p.s. the policy server example included in the postfix docs would
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 09:22:36AM -0400, Cary Lewis wrote:
> alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases
> mydomain = roadpost.org
> mydestination = roadpost.org, localhost, $mydomain, mail.roadpost.org,
> www.$mydomain, ftp.$mydomain
> myorigin = roadpost.com
>
> Here are some fragments from the maillo
I figured it out. There are default aliases for support and sales.
It's too bad the logs don't show what the alias engine is doing.
> On Oct 10, 2014, at 11:36 AM, Viktor Dukhovni
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 09:22:36AM -0400, Cary Lewis wrote:
>>
>> alias_database = hash:/etc/ali
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 12:46:47PM -0400, Cary Lewis wrote:
> I figured it out. There are default aliases for support and sales.
>
> It's too bad the logs don't show what the alias engine is doing.
They did, the local delivery agent reported forwarding the message
and the new queue-id. Forwar
In message <5437738e.70...@b1-systems.de>,
Lothar Gesslein wrote:
>This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
>--S3jn7wKsBSncUVQTga7T8Np436be1Lonq
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
>On 10/09/2014 08:25 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette
I think it is time to consider a jump in the Postfix major version
number, so that the next stable release will be Postfix 3.0 and not
2.12.
1) There are changes in the Postfix build system that are visible
only to people who build Postfix from source (mainly distribution
maintainers and some hard
On 10/10/2014 10:55 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> However with the incompatible changes in 2), I think that a major
> version number change is necessary. This may cause some delays in
> adoption, but I think it is only fair to people who have come to
> expect that upgrading Postfix is a no-brainer, be
Stephen Satchell:
> On 10/10/2014 10:55 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > However with the incompatible changes in 2), I think that a major
> > version number change is necessary. This may cause some delays in
> > adoption, but I think it is only fair to people who have come to
> > expect that upgrading
On 10/10/2014 12:09 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> It is, and always has been, called "release notes", and it will be
> no different than with other Postfix releases. The big-ticket items
> are detailed in INSTALL (build system) and COMPATIBILITY_README
> (managed transition to new default settings).
Problem: Valid email addresses being rejected.
Problem appears to be intermittent; difficult to tell most rejections
are legitimate.
Not found in a hash named virtualaliases.db
virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/virtualaliases
When the problem has been reported the addresses are found in the f
is that a new Account maybe? have you postmap virtualaiases file? Also, I
would make sure there is no miss-spelling?
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Robert Lopez wrote:
> Problem: Valid email addresses being rejected.
> Problem appears to be intermittent; difficult to tell most rejections
> ar
Stephen Satchell:
> On 10/10/2014 12:09 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > It is, and always has been, called "release notes", and it will be
> > no different than with other Postfix releases. The big-ticket items
> > are detailed in INSTALL (build system) and COMPATIBILITY_README
> > (managed transition
On 10/10/2014 2:21 PM, Robert Lopez wrote:
> Problem: Valid email addresses being rejected.
> Problem appears to be intermittent; difficult to tell most rejections
> are legitimate.
> Not found in a hash named virtualaliases.db
> virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/virtualaliases
> When the pro
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 10/10/2014 2:21 PM, Robert Lopez wrote:
>> Problem: Valid email addresses being rejected.
>> Problem appears to be intermittent; difficult to tell most rejections
>> are legitimate.
>> Not found in a hash named virtualaliases.db
>> virtual_a
Am 10.10.2014 um 23:35 schrieb Robert Lopez:
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
Please see:
http://www.postfix.org/DATABASE_README.html#safe_db
The question "So these errors happen while the file is being rebuilt,
right?" is a very good question but it is difficult for me to
LuKreme:
> I seem to have mislaid the note file in which I kept the build
> options that I built postfix with, and I am planning on recompiling
> a new version of postfix soon (It was supposed to be last month).
>
> What can I look at to figure out what the build options were for
> the currently in
Sometimes we just need to say this.
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 03:35:09PM -0600, Robert Lopez wrote:
> > Please see:
> > http://www.postfix.org/DATABASE_README.html#safe_db
>
> The question "So these errors happen while the file is being rebuilt,
> right?" is a very good question but it is difficult for me to answer
> with certainty.
24 matches
Mail list logo
