On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, Daniel Tiefnig wrote: > Hmm, looks very good. :o)
Hooray! > OpenSSL/2125 still fails like it did the last time. I may have to start sending you patches for that. I did change the name of a cipher to one that I thought should be recognisable. > maildir/5000 exim quota + warn threshold with maildir > =============== > Lines 3-6 of "test-mail-munged" do not match lines 3-6 of > "mail/5000.new/1.myhost.test.ex". > ---------- > id 10HmaZ-0005vi-00 > for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 09:44:33 +0000 > maildir:maildir_ > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ---------- > id 10HmaY-0005vi-00 > for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 09:44:33 +0000 > maildir:maildir_ > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > The MessageID is different, hard to spot at the first glance. > test-mail-munged also contains lots of the following line: > aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa That may be a hard one; different message ids usually means a timing effect has put the messages into a different order. > The failing address here is [EMAIL PROTECTED]::dcba], I'd guess this is due to > missing IPv6 support. Maybe you should split this into two tests and > omit the last one if IPv6 support is missing. Yes, indeed. That's what I'm supposed to be doing (in general), but I clearly overlooked that one. I'll see if I can figure out how to fix those when I do the next batch of updates next week. Philip -- Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714. Get the Exim 4 book: http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
