On 2016-10-02, Brian <a...@cityscape.co.uk> wrote: > On Sun 02 Oct 2016 at 21:41:50 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote: > >> On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 12:52:44PM +0100, Brian wrote: >> > >> > I have the same setup and all customisations (apart from hubbed_hosts) >> > have been done via debconf. TBH, I cannot see why /etc/hosts should be >> > consulted because I thought there is first a check for an MX record and >> > then an attempt to resolve the host *using the DNS* if there was none. >> > >> > Your instructions are clear so I can continue to try more customising >> > via debconf. >> > >> > mo appears to have had no more success than I have. Don't know about >> > Mark. >> > >> > -- >> > Brian >> > >> >> That's twice you've mentioned conf.d now, bear in mind in a >> defaults-accepting Debian installation of exim4, it's not used. > > It shouldn't make any difference whether the split configuration is used > or not for what we are doing. > > A defaults-accepting installation would use "local delivery only; not on > a network". Obviously this would not suit testing mail delivery to other > machines on the LAN. It was at this first page I made my mistake! > > I chose "Internet site......" because that is the way I always send > mail. No wonder I got "Unrouteable address". Was it clear that I should > have used "mail sent by smarthost......" (Liam?)?. Mystery solved. I've > not tested extensively but I can get mail to go to a user on another > machine.
ยง2.1 of /usr/share/doc/exim4-base/README.Debian.html (from exim4-base) provides some assistance. > > I'm not enamoured of this technique because it does not suit my mail > setup. So I will stick with the more versatile hubbed_hosts. > > Thanks for all the clues. > At least your curiosity has been satisfied. :) -- Liam