----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Bramble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> This can result in two copies of the file, one passed to Declude, and > one stolen by the running of the queue. So it can still appear in the > Declude logs, and chances are probably 80% that the Declude copy will at > least be held on one of our systems and therefore we may not know about > them. When I caught this on my server, the Declude copy was deleted. Good point. However, of the messages I have noticed with missing Declude headers, they were messages that did not meet a hold or delete weight requirement and were delivered normally. If IMail were delivering the message pre-Declude, as well as copy after being tested by Declude, wouldn't I get two copies of the message in my inbox, one delivered by IMail pre-Declude, and one post-Declude? I can post proof of this, if anyone is interested. Or, if you check the list archives, you will find previous posts I have made to this list with the audit trail to prove my point: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg10996.html http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg12246.html > I'm not sure what the full scope of the errors being experienced are, > but the queue thing that was suggested to have been fixed is one easily > identified by a line in your log in the middle of the entries for a > particular message being received that says the queue is being run. I'll look into this and see if I can find a correlation. Bill --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
