On 07 March 2002, Bart Schaefer said:
> Got this reply from the procmail list. Are you (Greg and/or Daniel) sure
> that you're using the proper procmailrc lockfile syntax on recipes that
> deliver to mailboxes?
I don't think locks are relevant in my case, since the bogus message was
forwarded to
Got this reply from the procmail list. Are you (Greg and/or Daniel) sure
that you're using the proper procmailrc lockfile syntax on recipes that
deliver to mailboxes?
- Forwarded from Philip Guenther:
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 18:59:28 -0600
From: Philip Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Bart
On Thu, Mar 07, 2002 at 03:24:36PM -0800, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> 3.21 is considered unstable; you should use either 3.15.2 or 3.22. I'm
> checking on the procmail list whether one of those is known to fix this
> particular bug.
Yay for redhat issuing unstable versions as errata...
I'm reading t
On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Daniel Rogers wrote:
> > Are you invoking spamc from procmail? What version of procmail?
>
> Yes, procmail 3.21
3.21 is considered unstable; you should use either 3.15.2 or 3.22. I'm
checking on the procmail list whether one of those is known to fix this
particular bug.
On 07 March 2002, Bart Schaefer said:
> What version of procmail?
The procmail-3.21-0.62 RPM from Red Hat 6.2.
Greg
--
Greg Ward - software developer[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MEMS Exchangehttp://www.mems-exchange.org
_
On Thu, Mar 07, 2002 at 02:01:47PM -0800, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> This same symptom has just been (re-)reported on the procmail mailing
> list. It appears to happen most often when the mailbox is also being
> accessed via MS Outlook (presumably with IMAP, but that's not clear).
I can tell you tha
On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Greg Ward wrote:
> * procmail noticed that spamassassin crashed, and "recovered" all
> of my message save that first "F". The local MTA managed to
> salvage something from that mess and send me a message I could
> deal with.
What version of procmail?
On 07 March 2002, Daniel Rogers said:
> In this case, I wind up with message getting delivered to mailboxes with the
> 'F' in the 'From ' line missing, which results in the mailboxes becoming
> corrupted.
>
> I had a quick look at the spamc source, but no obvious reason for this jumps
> out at me
On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Daniel Rogers wrote:
> In this case, I wind up with message getting delivered to mailboxes with the
> 'F' in the 'From ' line missing, which results in the mailboxes becoming
> corrupted.
>
> I had a quick look at the spamc source, but no obvious reason for this jumps
> out a
Sometimes I find it necessary to kill spamc (when I getting spammed
especially hard for example).
In this case, I wind up with message getting delivered to mailboxes with the
'F' in the 'From ' line missing, which results in the mailboxes becoming
corrupted.
I had a quick look at the spamc sourc
10 matches
Mail list logo
